A  tint  ®teo%ta/  ft 

7^  PRINCETON,  N.  J.  *^ 

Presented    by  (C\  .  C5^  .  C/<iANrocS.v-OY->  ~^\^  rD. 

Division 

Section  


THE 


V 


9 


No.  I. 


E^SAX  OX  liaTTlSMi. 


<\'ri:':L.y.  •tUf  H 


Thi"  Elder  unto  the  elect  lady  and  her  children  whom  I  love  in  the  trutli. 

3  JOBV  1 


ricumond: 

from  tbc  irranWin  IDtess, 

W.  W.  Gray,  Printrr 

1819. 


PREMONITION. 

The  (lesi.qn  of  the  publl*  ution  Uovc  roiniiK^nced  is,  in  a 
series  of  pivmplilrts,  to  iiw.iUcii  the  attention  of  tlic  public 
lo  several  siilijects  wliicli  it  is  (liuiiglit  have  not  been  suffi- 
ciently examined.  The  Discipline,  Doctrine  and  Order 
of  the  church  of  Jesus  C'.irist  will  be  discussed  with  a  view 
to  christian  practice,  and  the  true,  interests  of  society  con- 
nected with  ti:eni.  In  these  discussions,  there  will  fre- 
quently occur  a  statement  of  points,  in  which  christians 
differ.  But  if  any  expect  to  find  the  fierce  and  acrimoni- 
ous spirit  of  a  polemic  they  will  be  disappointed.  Indeed 
although  the  object  of  the  publication,  in  some  of  its  parts, 
is  to  afford  an  exposition  and  vindication  of  the  discipline 
and  order  of  a  particular  church,  it  is  intended  at  the  same 
time  to  show  tliat  the  (lifTerences  which  exist  among  chris- 
tians ought  not  to  prevent  their  holding  communion  toge- 
ther as  disciples  of  a  common  Lord.  In  fact  the  great  pur- 
pose is  to  promote  trutli  and  charity.  The  intention  of 
the  Editor  is  pure — What  his  success  may  be,  he  pretends 
not  to  predict.  Yov  this  he  looks  to  Heaven;  and  as  to  the 
merit  of  the  work,  he  leaves  it  to  the  public  to  decide. 

No  regularity  in  this  publication  can  be  promised — The 
Nos.  will  appear  as  suits  the  convenience  of  the  Editor: 
regard  however,  will  be  paid  to  the  demands  of  the  public. 
Uniforn)ity  in  page,  i)aper  and  type  will  be  preserved,  so 
that  the  several  numbers  may  be  hound  in  volumes  as  the 
proprietors  may  like  best. 


SCHEME  OF  THE  FOLLOWING  ESSAY. 

L  The  terms  Baptism  and  Baptise  are  explained.  And 
it  is  shown  that,  in  general  usage,  they  are  indeterminate 
in  signifirationj  but  tliat  in  a  religious  sense,  they  com- 
prehend both  an  external  rite,  and  the  discipline,  with  its 
effects  on  the  heart  and  in  the  life  represented  by  that  rite, 
pa.  1-8. 

II.  It  is  proposed  to  show  that  baptism  is  to  be  adminis- 
tered to  those  who  profess  faith  in  Christ,  and  obedience 
to  him;  and  that  infants  descending  from  parents,  either 
both  or  but  one  of  them  professing  faith  in  Christ  are  to 
be  baptised,  pa.  10. — Proposition  1st — briefly  considered, 
because  no  dispute  on  the  subject,  pp.  10-11.  Proposition 
2d — namely,  that  the  child  of  a  believing  parent  ought  to 
be  baptised,  considered  at  large,  and  proved,  1.  By  the 
analogy  between  the  constitution  of  nature  and  of  the 
church;  the  cmdition  of  children  in  each  case  being  con- 
nected w  ith  that  of  their  parents,  pp.  11-13. — 2.  By  show- 
ing that  the  church  was  organized  in  the  family  of  Abra- 
ham, that  the  initiatory  rite  from  the  beginning  had  a  spi- 
ritual signification,  that  this  rite  was  applied  to  the  chil- 
dren of  church-members,  and  that  when  the  church  was 
placed  on  its  christian  foundation,  no  change  was  made  in 
this  respect,  pp.  13-27  — 3.  By  examining  the  commission 
given  to  the  apostles,  when  christian  baptism  was  insti- 
tuted, and  enquiring  into  the  extent  in  which  they  would 
receive  and  execute  it;  from  which  it  appears  that  the  apos- 
tles, having  always  been  accustomed  to  see  children  ad- 
mitted into  the  visible  church,  would  naturally  apply  bap- 
tism as  an  initiating  ordinance  to  them,  pp.  28-34. — 4.  By 
examining  the  record  concerning  the  practice  of  the  apostles, 
from  which  it  appears  to  be  a  positive  and  unquestionable 
fact  that  they  baptised  the  families  of  believers;  and  indeed, 
that  such  baptism  was  a  common  occurrence,  and  that,  in 
circumstances  renderingit  utterly  incredible  that  there  were 
no  young  children — particularly  it  is  shown,  that  the  word 


i-endcrcd  household  was  the  tliroct,  proper,  and  unequivo- 
cal term  to  oxpn'ss  rliililren;  and  that  the  sense  of  it  in  tljc 
coniii'Ction  in  whi(li  it  stands,  makes  it  more  clear  that  they 
were  haptised,  than  if  it  had  heen  said,  the  apostles  hap- 
tised  Lydia  and  her  cliiidren,  pp.  34-6.1. — 5.  By  the  ex- 
press and  repeated  testimony  of  the  primitive  Fathers  of 
the  Church,  that  they  received  the  practice  of  haptising 
children  from  the  apostles,  pp.  G4-69. — It  is  then  proved 
from  scripture,  particularly  tlie  passage  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  that 
if  one  of  the  parents  is  a  heliever,  the  baptism  of  the  chil- 
dren is  authorised  and  required,  i)p.  70-7  4. 

III.  In  the  concluding  part  of  the  work  the  mode  of  ad- 
ministration is  considered,  and  it  is  undertaken  to  be 
proved  that.  Dipping  the  person  into  the  water  is  not  ne- 
cessary; but  that  baptism  is  rightly  administered  by  pour- 
ing or  sprinkling  water  on  the  person.  This  is  prov- 
ed, 1.  By  showing  that  the  original  word  is  indeter- 
minate as  it  is  used  by  Greek  writers  in  general,  and 
that  Lexicographers  give  to  it  sc'/^  n  different  significations. 
2.  By  an  examination  of  every  passage  in  the  N.  Testa- 
ment in  which  the  words  baptise  and  baptism  occur;  from 
which  it  appears  that  in  no  single  instance  it  is  evident  that 
baptism  was  performed  by  immersion,  and  in  some  instan- 
ces it  is  manifest  that  this  was  not  the  case,  as  in  the  bap- 
tism of  Paul  and  the  Jailor,  pp.  74  to  the  conclusion. 

In  this  Essay  the  utmost  care  has  been  taken  to  avoid 
harsh  expressions,  and  every  thing  that  could  reasonably 
give  offence.  Tlie  words  to  plunge,  to  submerge,  and  sub- 
mersion, have  been  several  times  introduced  merely  be- 
cause it  has  been  supposed  by  some  that  immersion  does 
not  adequately  express  the  idea  intended  to  be  conveyed 
by  those  wlio  use  it,  and  contend  for  that  mode  of  adminis- 
tering the  rite  under  consid<'ration.  This  remark  is  here 
introduced  to  prevent  the  supposition  even,  that  there  was 
any  intention  of  speaking  lightly  concerning  any  manner 
of  administering  so  holy  an  ordinance.  The  Author  is  m- 
cnpahlc  of  any  attempt  to  turn  into  ridicule   thai   which  his 


M 


fellow  christians  esteem  sacred,  however  he  may  disapprove 
of  their  practice.  He  respects  their  feeling-s,  when  he  dif- 
fers from  their  opinions;  and  while  he  wishes  to  show  their 
error,  he  prays  that  grace,  mercy  and  peace  may  be  multi- 
plied unto  them,  "  and  all  who  call  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  both  their  Lord  and  ours." 


(0*'  In  looking  over  the  pages  of  the  following  pam- 
phlet as  they  came  from  the  printer,  we  have  seen  several  lit- 
tle things  which  we  wish  altered.  They  are  noted  here  that 
the  reader  may  see  them,  and  make  the  changes  if  he 
thinks  proper. 

There  is  a  sentence.  Introduction  pa.  ii.  line  12  and  on- 
wards, which  does  not  clearly  express  the  meaning  intend- 
ed: let  it  be  understood  thus — '«  When  religion  is  prevalent, 
and  opinions  and  rituals,  jjresented  as  its  doctrines  and  in- 
stitutions, are  received  without  due  inquiry,  and  without 
that  collision  of  sentiment,  which  exercises  the  understand- 
ing, &c. 

Page  6,  line  10,  insert  and,  before  referred. 

Page  7,  line  4  from  bottom,  for  right,  read  rite^ 

Page  8,  line  5,  for  he  read  he. 

Page  9,  line  15,  erase  any. 

line  4  from  bottom,  for  nor  read  or. 

Page  18,  line  18,  erase  the  comma  after,  and  insert  it 
before,  is. 

Page  27,  line  6  from  bottom,  for  implied  read  implies. 

Page  37 — The  reference  on  this  page  to  «  Facts  and 
Evidences,**  &c.,  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  marginal  refci'ence, 
and  the  reader  will  pass  over  it  as  though  it  w:'«s  not  there; 
the  sentence  immediately  following  it,  being  a  continua- 
tion of  that  which  immediately  precedes  it. 

Page  47,  line  19,  for  lease  read  leave. 


Vll 


In  \is\s;c  51 — Sliotilil  the  iTader  enquire  how  the  Jailor 
rejoiced  with  his  family  if  they  were  infants;  let  him  an- 
swer how  it  was  that  God,  out  of  the  mouths  of  babes  and 
sucKLi.VGs  perfected  praise?  Matt.  xxi.  IG. 

Ill  pai^e  52,  line  12  from  the  bottom,  Thcssaloma  is  prin- 
ted instead  of  Thessalonicn. 

Paj^e  55,  line  20,  for  heferc  read  before. 

Ta'^q.  GS. — Rcspeetiii.u;  the  household  of  Stepiianas,  it  oucfht 
to  have  been  remarked  tliat  as  this  e|)istle  was  written  to 
the  Corinthians  several  years  after  the  baptism  of  Stephaoas* 
fanjily,  it  is  \^\"s  jjossible  that  some  at  least  of  the  membere, 
who  were  baptised  when  yoiin.^,  miglit  hav»^  been  old 
enoij.2;h  at  this  time  to  render  offices  of  kindness  to  the 
saints.  If  the  jijercding  explanations  fail  then,  our  argii- 
miMit  is  not  invaji(hited. 

Pa.^e  73. — The  members  of  the  Corinthian  church  might 
very  well  raise  a  doubt  wiiethee  they  should  continue,  after 
conversion,  to  live  with  idolatrous  'husbands  or  wives.  There 
wei;;>many  Jews  amongst  them;  and  we  all  know  what  the 
Jewish  law  and  the  Jewish  prejudices  were  on  this  subject. 
Let  the  reader  compare  the  argument  on  this  page  with 
the  ix.  and  xth  chapters  of  the  book  of  Ezra.  He  will  sec 
at  once  the  reason  of  the  doubt;  and  that  the  declaration  of 
the  apostle  that  the  "children  are  holy,'*  that  is  a  seed 
consecrat»Ml  to  God,  settles  the  question  at  once. 

Page  74 — line  8  from  bottom,  for  cousidering  read  consi' 
dering. 

*<  The  Christian  religion  every  where,"  Sec.  It  is  not 
intended  here  to  insinuate  that  the  ordinances  of  the  church, 
whi(  h  may  very  properly  be  termed  external  observances, 
are  trivial;  that  is,  that  it  is  a  trifling  question  whether  a 
man  shall  observe  t'lem  or  not — But  that  the  outward  form 
or  manner  of  <»bservance  is  a  small  matter;  Thus  whether 
we  sing  the  version  of  Sternh  dd  and  Hopkins,  of  Brady 
and  VMv,  of  R.iuse,  or  Watts,  is  no  atfair  which  ought  to 
separate  churclies,  ^:c. 


vm 


Page  78,  line  6  from  bottom,  in  some  copies  for  lia  e  read 
fiave. 

Page  84,  line  7  for  the  people  read  they;  namely,  the  mc- 
thodists. 

Page  85,  No.  xxxv.  in  some  copies  bajytised  occurs  instead 
oi' baptising. 

Page  87,  line  3  from  bottom,  read  "  And  the  high  priest 
arose  and  said." 

Page  92 Additional  remark  on  Rom  vi.  4,  and  Col.  ii. 

11,  12.  The  rite  of  burial  is  different  in  different  countries 
and  in  different  ages.  The  Greek  and  Romans  buried 
their  dead  bodies  and  laid  up  the  ashes  in  urns:  The  an- 
cient Egyptians  embalmed  them;  and  deposited  them  in 
buildings  prepared  for  the  purpose.  The  ancient  Jew* 
hewed  sepulchres  in  the  solid  rock,  as  mentioned  in  pa.  93. 
The  Hindoos  burn  their  dead,  and,  if  tliey  can,  throw  the 
ashes  into  the  Ganges.  Now,  [(burial  in  baptism  expresses 
the  mode  of  administral'on,  what  mode  is  that?  It  is  easy 
to  see  that  the  manner  of  burying  will  suggest  entirely  dif- 
ferent ideas  to  different  people. 


AK 


ESSAY 


OS 


'smmi^'TM,^  iB^ip^asaa, 


INTRODUCTION. 


ALL  that  concerns  the  administration  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  is  worthy  of  attention.  The  various  appointments 
of  the  great  Head  of  the  Church,  are  made  in  wisdom.  No 
institutions  are  arbitrary;  none  intended  for  mere  parade 
and  show.  Every  thing  has  a  reference  to  practice,  and  a 
bearing  on  the  great  interests  of  morality.  It  is  then  the 
duty  of  Christians  to  examine  for  themselves,  and  ascer- 
tain the  will  of  God,  respecting  the  discipline,  as  well  as 
the  doctrine  of  tlie  Christian  Church. 

The  fact,  that  on  these  subjects  there  is  a  diversity  of 
opinion  among  Christians,  furnishes  no  valid  objection  to 
the  discussion  of  the  points  of  difTerenre;  but  rath<*r  an 
argument  in  favour  of  such  investigation  as  tends  to  pro- 
mote knowledge  of  the  truth  among  all  parties.  It  is  true, 
that  while  temperate  discussion  is  at  all  times  proper,  it  is 
peculiarly  so  whenbnthreri  differ;  and  differ  too, on  points 
which  it  is  alike  the  interest  of  ail  to  determine.  But  this 
does  not  imply  that,  because  men  cull  themselves  Christi- 
ans, they  ought  not  to  engage  in  argument  on  the  peculiar- 
ities which  separate  them.  Nor  can  we  see  how  tliis  sen- 
timent, prevalent  as  it  is,  can  be  supported  on  any,  but 


11 

such  principles  as  follow.  Either,  all  pailies  are  right,- 
even  when  tliey  hold  opposite  opinions:  or  the  suhjects  oi 
difference  arc  utterly  unimportant,  and  unworthy  of  the 
trouble  of  enfiuiry.  The  first  case  involves  the  absurdity, 
that  opposite  opinions  are  true:  and  the  second  implies, 
that  the  institutions  of  our  Lord  arc  trivial  in  their  nature; 
a  sentiment  which  no  Christian  can  for  a  moment  admit. 
Wliile,  then,  the  fierce  contentions  of  ane,i"y  jjolemics  are' to 
be  condemned,  liberal  enquiry  and  fair  investigation  ought 
to  be  encouraged. 

Another  view  of  the  subject  ought  not  to  be  unnoticed. 
When  religion  is  prevalent,  and  its  doctrines  and  institiN 
tions  are  received  without  due  enquiry,  and  that  collision 
of  opinion,  which  exercises  the  untlcRstanding,  the  great 
body  of  the  people  soon  get  into  the  leading  strings  of  their 
ministers,  their  consciences  are  placed  under  human  con- 
trol, and  they  are  disposed  to  yield  to  tiie  demands  of  eccle- 
siastics, what  ought  to  be  yielded  only  to  tlie  Lord  of  con- 
science. Religion  then  becomes  corrupted,  is  made  an  in- 
strument of  avarice  and  ambition,  and  fiom  the  best  af 
heaven's  gifts,  is  pervei-ted  to  one  of  the  deadliest  evils.— ^ 
As  a  friend  to  true  religion,  to  human  liberty^  and  to  hu- 
man liappiness,  this  writer  wishes  to  sec  a  spirit  of  free 
and  enterprizing  investigation  prevail;  and  is  sorry  to  ob- 
serve a  disposition  to  brand  with  the  odious  name  of  contro- 
versy, every  thing  that  brings  into  q«estion  any  sentiments 
adopted  by  any  who  call  themselves  christians. 

It  is  readily  admitted  that  every  individual  has  a  perfect 
right  to  his  own  opinions  on  the  general  subject  of  religi- 
on, and  on  all  its  modes  and  forms.  It  is  a  matter  between 
him  and  his  God,  as  long  as  he  kee])S  it  to  himself.  But 
the  case  is  changed  as  soon  as  these  opinions  are  made 
public.  Every  man  then  has  a  right  to  animadvert  on 
them,  and  shew  them  to  be  false,  if  he  can  do  so  by  fair  ar- 
gument. A»id,  indeed,  if  I  know  a  man's  private  senti- 
ments, and  am  persuaded  that  they  afe  injurious  to  him,  if. 


1U 


Vn  t!.«  way  ol  mcckiioss  ami  duuily  I  ran  ronvinrc  l.im  of 
liis  orror,  ami  '.iPi'suadr  liim  lo  rcnounrc  it,  Nvhal  harm  is 
<l„„,.?_TI.i.s  innaik,  it  (>u.i,'I.Uo  be  said,  is  niaile  with  a 
strong  fecline:  of  dislike  to  ;«11  obtrusive  and  impudent  at- 
tempts to  convert  men  fi'am  what  is  supposed  to  he  the  er- 
i-oi-  orthiir  ways;  an  utter  disMpprohation  of  that  blind  and 
l.eadlon.s;  /enl,  which  is  ever  ready  to  denounce  its 
blusteriiia:  anathemas  against  every  man  that  it  designates 
as  a  sinner.  Meekness  and  ejcntlcnr ss  ought  to  ciiarac^er- 
ize  all  attempts  to  prmnot<«  religious  knowledge.  Truth 
is  coMsrious  of  her  own  strength,  and  advances  with  all 
ihc  dignity  of  calmness  and  tranquility  to  tlic  accomplish- 
ment of  her  purposes. 

In  this  Essay,  an  attempt  to  promote  the  truth  shall  be 
regulated  by  the  principles  stated  above.     No  ill-natured 
and  contentious  remarks  shall  be  made  on  any  denomina- 
tion of  christians.     What  is  believed  to  be  agreeable  to  the 
will  of  God,  shall  be  dispassionately  stated;  and  the  deci- 
sion left  to  every  reader.      Should  the  writer  bucceed  in 
producing  strong  arguments,  and  any  under  tlieir  pressure 
should  be  disposed  to  raise  a  cry  of  persecution,  the  candid 
pf  all  parties  will  know  how  to  appreciate  this;  and  will  not 
pass  censure  on  one  who  only  vindicates  the  truth,  aa<l  op- 
poses what  he  bclieve>s  to  be  error.      And  should  the  effort 
be  feeble— fr/um  imbvll-  sine.  n/»— he  hopes  that  no  offiiu  e 
will  be  taken,  at  an  honest  attempt  to  prf)motc   t!.e  truth, 
by  those  who  agree  with  him;  and  surely  his  bretliren.  who 
differ  in  sentiment,  will  §ivc  him  credit  for  all  the  kindness 
which  he   may  express,  an«l  will  not  be  offended  at  iii'^ 

failure! 

The  author  of  thiii  Essay  does  not  preteml  that  it  i 
original  work;  but  rather  a  (  ompilation.      Use  Iwis 
freely  made  (.f  various  writers  on  the  subject,  to  w".  . 
fin-ence  will  be  ma<le  in  the  ju-opcr  places.      Tin       > 
sign  of  the  little  work  heie  offered  to  the  public,  is  t . 
bodv  some  of  the  best  remarks  that  have  been  made  oi. 


IT 


much  contpoverfed  subjcrt;  arrange  t!iem  in  perspicuous 
order,  and  pr  sent  them  in  narrow  compass  and  cheap  form, 
for  the  benefit  of  those  who  may  please  to  read.  Especial- 
ly, it  was  intended  to  present  a  manual  to  christian  fami- 
lies, that  have  not  the  means  of  extended  research  on  the 
subject,  and  fo  afford  to  young  t^nquirers  a  view  of  the  doc- 
trine and  practice,  which  he  judges  to  he  scriptural. 

The  writer  wishes  thi^t  the  public  may  favourably  re- 
ceive his  humble  attempt;  a,nd  he  prays  that  it  may  be  ac- 
companied with  the  divine  blessing,  which  he  knows  can 
alone  give  success  to  the  labours  of  man. 


Richmond,  25th  Mgust,  1819. 


ES8AY  ON  BAPTISM. 


IN  prosecutinj*  this  suhject,  the  obsorvations  to  be  made, 
shall  be  distributed  into  three  parts,  f.  Th  •  Nature  and 
Design  of  Baptism.  II.  The  Subjects  of  Baptism.  III. 
The  Mode  of  Administering  the  Ordinance.  To  which  may 
probably  be  added,  some  practical  remarks  as  a  conclusion. 

PART  I. 

THE    NATURE    AND    DESIGN   OF  BAPTISM. 

Baptism  and  baptise  arc  Greek  words  with  an  Eng- 
lish termination.  The  originals  have  not  been  trans- 
lated in  any  version  of  the  scriptures  to  which  recourse 
can  now  be  had.  The  Vulgate  uses  baptismus  and 
baptizo;  the  French  translation,  la  baptemc  and  baptiser; 
the  Italian,  battesimo  and  battezzare;  and  tho  English  bap- 
tism and  baptise.  Tlie  reason  why  these  various  transla- 
tors have  chosen  to  retain  the  original  words  is,  because 
they  could  find  none  in  their  languages  adequate  to  the  id<»a 
of  the  original.  For,  in  regard  to  the  exteriud  ordinance, 
the  word  baptism  expresses  the  application  of  water  or  any 
other  fluid  in  a  manner  so  undeterminate,  that  none  of  the 
terms  that  are  thought  to  be  correspondent  to  fhe  orii;inal, 
are  equally  general  and  comprehensive.  And  it  is  unjus- 
tifiable to  restrict  the  meaning  of  a  general  word  to  a  par- 
ticular application. 

But  besides  this,  there  is  another  reason  why  these  terms 
have  not  been  translated.  Tiieir  signification  extends  be- 
yond the  mere  designation  of  an  external  ordinance,  and 
embraces  the  great  object  of  that  ordinance,  as  it  respects 
purification  from  moral  defilement,  and  embuing  with  the 
principles  of  true  holiness.  Now,  neither  washing,  nor  sub- 
iQersion,  nor  pouring,  nor  sprinkling,  nor  any  other  known 


term,  except  the  original,  comprehends  Ihcac  several  idcas^ 
It  is  wise,  therefore,  not  to  attempt  to  translate  them  by  a 
single  wortl,  as  many  are  ready  to  do. 

For  confirmation  of  these  remarks,  let  us  examine  the 
original — TJie  primitive  word  is  /SaTtrid  and  tlie  prima- 
ry idea  of  this  is,  to  staiji,  to  dye,  that  is  tp  produce  such  a 
chaiigc  of  texture,  as  produces  a.clia»?ge  of  colour.  Of  this 
Hse  of  the  word,  many  examples  might  he  ^fifordcd:  a  few 
may  suffice.  E^aTtTeto  h'ai^an  "ki^iv^  the  pool  was  ting- 
ed with  blood.  Homer.  /?a7i7£t  xau  avBc'^ei  tyiv  x^^9^^  ^^ 
stains  and  renders  florid  tlie  hand,  Aristotle.  l^aliov 
6s6afi(isvov  aifjari.  Rev.  xix.  13.  In  conformity  to  this 
signification,  woi'ds  appropriate  to  t!ic  art  of  dyeing  are  de- 
rived from  this  theme;  thus  fSa^ri  is  the  act  of  dyeing, 
^a^n^g  is  a  dyer,  /^a^)^;©^  is  the  art  of  dyeing,  d6ap)g  is  un- 
dyed,  A(6'ad)0$  is  twice  dyed,  &c.  Hence  it  appears  that, 
to  stain  or  dye,  is  the  radical  idea  of  the  Ayord,  To  this 
may  be  added,  that  to  stain  or  dye  is  more  extensive  than 
to  dip  or  plunge,  because  thn  operation  of  staining  may  be 
performed  by  yai'ious  modes  of  applying  tlic  colouring  mat- 
ter, as,  by  sprinkling,  effusion,  dipping,  or  subniersionj 
but  dipping  is  one  simple  action.  It  is  true,  however,  that 
as  a  change  of  colour  is  most  commonly  produced  by  a 
long  continued  immersion,  the  word  l^antcd  caiije  to  signi- 
fy to  immerse,  to  dip,  to  plunge.  But  then  it  acquired  va- 
rious other  significations,  and  became  very  indefinite  in  its 
application,  signifying  as  suits  the  sense  to  stain,  dye,  dip, 
wet,  wash,  purify.  From  this  word  is  derived  that  (^^anli^o) 
which  is  used  to  express  the  performance  of  the  sacred  rite 
of  baptism.  This,  as  its  primitive,  is  of  very  general  sig- 
nification, as  will  appear  from  the  following  examples: — 
1.  from  the  Septuagint.  2.  Kings  v.  14,  And  JNaaman 
went  down,  mi.  sSanliaalo  iv  ra  lopSav/: £7ildxig,  ^nd  wash- 
ed himself  at  (or  in)  the  Jordan  seven  times.  This  trans- 
lation is  thus  justified.      In  the  10th  verse  wc  read  that. 


KHshii  sent  11  ui.  ^:sciis;er  to  him  sayinej,  fio,  (^^imgcu  snlaxig 
ti>  roi  hobdiv;)  waslv  seven  times  at  oi*  in  tlio  Jordan;  and 
(lie  Instni'ian  ad'.ls.  In',  went;  and  did  \v!i:it?  Washed,  cer- 
tainly- Here,  then  t!ic  general  word,  ?^(,>  to  wash,  and 
SaTtlii^id  to  bapti/o,  arc  equivalent.  It  may  l)C  thought  by 
9(>ine,  however,  tijat  the  latter  word  is  intended  to  desig- 
nati^  the  piirUciiIai*  mode  in  which  tlic  Syrian  general  exe- 
cuted the  i>rop!jct's  command,  namely,  by  dipping  o»' ptntig- 
ing  seven  times  in  the  Jordan.  But  on  tlii^  it  is  obvious 
to  remark,  that  the  prophet  has  allusion  to  tlio  manner  of 
cleajising  a  leper,  prescribed  in  t!ie  Jawisli  Law.  «  Now 
there  were  two  ways  of  applying  water  enjoined  by  tliat 
law;  both  alike  commanded  and  necessary  to  his  cleansing^ 
viz.  batldn^i  and  sprinkling:  the  former  to  be  used  bwtonce; 
the  latter  to  be  done  seven  times.  Lev.  xiv.  r,  8.  Hence 
it  is  probable  that  the  prophet  did  not  direct  the  Syrian 
captain  to  immerse  or  plunge  himself  seven  times  in  the 
Jordan,  but  to  peiToi-m  his  ablution  in  the  customary  wayj 
that  is,  by  sjn-iukliiig. 

The  next  passage  in  the  Septuagint,  wliere  the  word  oc- 
curs, is  Isai.  xxi.  -4:  the  literal  version  of  which  is,  <•  And 
ini([uity  baptiscth  me."  This  language  is  so  highly  iigu- 
rative,  that  no  prudent  reasoner  will  make  any  use  of  it  in 
determining  the  literal  signification  of  the  word.  There 
is  a  j)assagc,  however,  in  the  book  of  Judith,  xii.  7,  iu 
which  it  clearly  signifies  to  wash.  "■  And  she  went  out  by 
night  to  the  valley  of  Bethulia,  and  washed  herself  at  a 
fountain  of  water  in  the  camp."  (xaj.  eSavSli^elo  sv  ryj) 
Tta^s^Sokri  87x1  ry;g  n/jyyjg  T»  vSaro^.)  Here,  iis  was  said,  we 
can  only  render  the  word  by  the  English  term,  to  wash. — 
And  it  seems  evident  that  this  washing  was  not  jjerformed 
by  immersioji.  The  same  observations  may  be  made  on 
Ecclesiasticus,  xxxiv.  25:  "  He  that  washeth  himself  af- 
ter touching  a  dead  body,  if  he  touch  it  again,  what  avail- 
ethhis  washing?"  {[SaTtriiotjBvog  dno  i-Expn.) 

2.  In  the  nexl   niaro^  some  passages  in  tlwi  New  Testa- 


4 


ment  will  be  considered,  with  a  view  of  asceitaiuing  tlie 
proper  meaning  of  the  word,  baptism,  which,  wc  remind 
our  readers,  is  a  Greek  word — Mark  vii.  4.  «  And  wlien 
they  come  from  market,  unless  tliey  wash,  [^anlidoivrai) 
they  cat  not.  And  many  other  things  there  be,  which 
they  have  received  to  liold,  as  the  washing  (SaTttLdusg) 
of  cups  ajid  pots  and  brazen  vessels,  and  of  tables — Luke 
xi.  38.  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he  marvelled  that 
he  Ijad  not  first  washed  [e6anHinByi)  ''^fore  dinner."  These 
citations  shew  that  the  word  is  used  in  various  passages, 
where  the  leading  i<?ea  is  cleansing  ov  pjinjication,  the  man- 
ner of  which  is  undetermined^  only  the  notion  of  submer- 
sion or  plunging,  seems  to  be  excluded  in  several  of  these 
cases. 

Before  wc  proceed  farther,  the  reader  ought  to  be  remind- 
ed that  the  original  or  root  of  the  word  under  considera- 
tion, signifies  to  tinge,  to  dye,  to  imbue  with  d  colour. — 
Now  it  would  seem  that  this  idea  is  implied  in  the  religi- 
ons use  of  the  word  baptise.  When  our  Saviour  promises 
that  !ic  will  baptise  his  disciples  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  he 
represents,  by  the  use  of  water  in  a  religious  ceremony, 
the  effect  of  the  Spirit  in  his  influences,  coming  on  them, 
namely  giving,  so  to  speak,  a  new  texture  to  their  minds, 
removing  their  moral  defilement,  and  imbuing  them  with 
divine  knowledge,  with  hoUj  •principles.  It  is  not  easy,  with- 
out keeping  this  idea  in  uiind,  to  und-rsiaud  thi*  comm  >n 
modes  of  expression  adopted  by  the  sacred  writers.  They 
very  commonly  use  such  phraseology  as  this  for  instance. 
Acts  xix.  3,  4.  "  Into,  (or  unto)  what  were  ye  baptised 
then?  They  said,  into  John's  baptism.  Ami  P.iul  said  un- 
to them,  John  indeed  baptised  the  baptism  of  repentance, 
saying  to  the  people  that  they  should  believe,"  &c.  Now 
if  we  limit  the  words  to  the  slgnificatiou  of  a  mere  exier- 
nal  rite,  and  suppose  that  baptism  has  a  restricted  signifi- 
cation, say  immersion  or  submersion,  what  will  b"  the 
meaning?      Paul  in  this  case  asks,  «  Into  what  then  were 


5 


ye  innncrsrtl."  When  \vc  c.vpcct  tlic  disciplos  to  answer 
most  iiatiiiMlly,  <•  Tut.)  wati*;*'* — we  arc  utterly  disappoiut- 
ctl,  and  arc  told  tlicy  wrw  iinniersed  into  .loliii's  imnu'i'- 
siori.  But  this  is  most  nr.iiiilV'stly,  neitlier  sense  nor  Kuv;- 
lisli.  The  ocrasion  of  haul's  (|ii.'sM(»n  may  help  us  out  oftiiLs 
difficulty.  He  had  asked  if  th.'  discipleiei  had  received  the 
Holy  Spirit.  They  re|)Iy  tliat  tliey  had  not  heard  of  the 
Holy  S|)irit. — He  immediately  asks,  into  what  were  ye  then 
baptised;  with  what  doctrines  were  your  minds  embued, 
that  you  arc  isjnorant  of  the  Holy  Sj)irit?  'i'hey  answer, 
wc  were  baptised  into  Juhn's  Kaptisin — We  received  the 
rite  from  him,  and  learned  his  lessons.  Paul  observes, 
*»'  John  baptised  the  baptism  of  repentance,"  &.c. — Now, 
here,  baptism  includes,  not  (July  the  ordinance  administer- 
ed by  Joim,  but  the  system  of  doctrine  taught  by  him,  with 
which  be  imbued  the  minds  of  his  disciples. 

This  reminds  us  of  one  j^reater  than  J(»lin. — When  our 
Lord  instituted  biiptism,  he  used  lan,e;u;ige  which  1  can  in- 
terpret in  no  other  way,  than  in  that  just  stated. — *•  Go,'* 
said    he,  **  and   make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baj)tising 
them  into  the   name  of  the  Father  the  Son   and  the  Holy- 
Ghost,   teaciiin.i^  them,"  Ace.      Now,  here  a   similar  (j[ues- 
tion  occuis. — Baptisinu; — plunginic — them  into  what?  Con- 
fining the  word  to  mere   matters   of  external   observance, 
would  not  every   reader  suppose  that  the  fluid  into   which 
all  nations  should  be  jilunged,  would   be  stated?     But  no: 
they  are  to  be  baptised  into  the  name  of  the  Father  Son 
and  Spirit.     But  who  does  not  see  that  it  is  absurd  to  talk 
of  being  immersed   into   a  name?        The  word,  dmibtlese 
liere  includes  the  idea  of  instruction. — Teach  them  the  ex- 
istence, attrihutes  and  ollices  of   F'ather  Son  and  Spirit,  of 
the  effects  of  whi(  h  instruction,  the  ordinance  of  baptism  is 
a  happy  representation.     The  particular  words  (iSanliCuo^ 
ii"<'  ^anlt^id.)    Baptism  and  Baptise,  were  used  to  desig- 
nate the  sacred  ordinance  under  consideration,  because,  ip 
their  primary  sense,  they   bigi»ify  to  dye,   in  imbue,  and 
B 


6 


hence  the  application  of  a  fliiid  in  any  manner,  suited  to  tlm 
purpose  to  be  accomplis'ned.  The  process  of  dycinj^,  Iiown 
ever,  implies  a  previous  cleansing  ui  the  thing  to  be  dyed 
from  every  extraneous  matter,  and  an  application  of  the 
coloui-ing  substance  to  it  in  a  state  of  purity.  Now,  these 
complex  ideas  cannot  be  expressed  by  any  single  term  in 
the  English  language^  the  translators  of  the  Bible,  then, 
did  well  not  to  render  the  words  by  immerse  and  immer- 
siofi,  wash  and  washing,  or  any  sitigle  terms.  They  wise- 
ly left  the  word  uittranslate;!;  referred  the  true  explana- 
tion of  it  to  the  industry  and  learn' ng  gf  those  whose  office 
it  is  to  expound  scripture. 

These  remarks  will  hf^lp  us  to  the  true  import  of  this  or- 
dinance. Baptism  as  an  external  rite,  is  the  application 
of  water  to  a  fit  subject  in  the  name  of  the  Father  Son  and 
Holy  Spirit.  By  this  ordinance  we.  are  taught,  1.  That 
man  is  a  sinful  being,  and  that  he  must  be  freed  from  the 
rnoral  defilement  of  sin.  2.  That  by  the  blood  of  Christ  and 
by  the  sanctifying  influences  of  the  Hol}^  Spirit  we  are  to  be 
freed  from  sin  and  made  holy.  3.  That  this  event  is  to  be  ac- 
complished by  the  instrumentality  of  truth  communicated  to 
the  baptised  in  the  ordinary  way  of  instruction.  And  to  this 
view  of  the  subject  we  are  lead  by  the  terms  used  by  our 
Saviour  in  instituing  the  ordinance^  "  Go,  and  make  dis- 
ciples of  all  nations,  baptising  them  in  the  name  of  the  Fa- 
ther Son  and  Holy  Spirit;  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you." 

There  is  another  view  of  this  subject  which  ought  to  be 
taken.  Baptism  is  not  only  a  sign,  by  which  the  things 
mentioned  are  represented  to  our  senses;  but  it  is  a  seal 
by  which  the  things  promised  in  the  word  of  God  are  as- 
sured to  us.  It  is  «  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith*" 
Now  the  righteousness  of  faitli  is  called  God's  righteousness; 
and  the  phrase  implies  that  glorious  plan  according  to  which 
God  enlightens  the  benighted  sinner,  grants  him  repentance. 
iinto  life,  pardons  his  sins  through  Jesus  Christ,  justifies 


his  ptTson,  Sanctifies  hlM  wliolc  nature,  and  iUs  him  for 
iliavoii.  Now  wlion  this  seal  is  applied  to  anyone,  it  is 
not  for  a  testimony  that  that  person  truly  believes  and  is 
ei(ti{I;-;l  to  tlie  blessioajs  of  the  ronvoriajit  of  mercy — for 
who  then  would  adventure  V)  aduiiuistrr  haptism,  witluiut 
bein;^  first  invested  v.ith  tiie  i)rerogative  of  searchinj;  the 
heart?  But  if  is  (io.i's  seal:  it  is  fur  a  testimony  on  the 
part  of  God,  that  !le  will  |)erf(>rm  all  that  lie  has  promised, 
that  he  will  j*ive  ellieary  to  the  means  of  his  own  appoint- 
ment. The  ordinance  is  intended  to  confirm  the  faith  of  the 
rhurrh  in  the  divine  promised,  and  assure  the  people  of  God 
that  the  discijjline  of  his  church  shall  not  he  ineflioient  for 
her  moral  purification;  and  for  imbuing  with  principles  of 
h(di!iess  all>  who  sjbmit  with  a  teachable  tcinjicr  to  this 
disripline. 

The  Word  baptism  may  also  signify  the  effect  produced 
by  tiic  truth  which  the  oi'dinance  represents.  In  this  sense 
the  a|)ostles  use  such  phrases  as  the  fdlowing,  «•  We  arc 
buried  with  him  by  baptism  unto  death,"  &c.  Rom.  vi.  4, 
In  whom  also  ye  are  circumcised  with  a  circumcision  made 
without  hands  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  flesh  by  the 
circumcision  of  Christ,  being  buried  with  him  in  baptism. 
Col.  ii.  12.  The  antitype  to  which,  baptism,  (not  the  put- 
ting away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  stipulation  (an- 
swer) of  a  good  conscience  towards  God)  doth  now  save 
us."  1  Pet.  iii.  21.  Here  the  thing  signified  by  baptism 
is  called  by  the  name  of  the  rite  itself.  Tliis  is  expressly 
declared  by  Peter.  He  had  spoken  of  the  deluge,  and  of  the 
preservation  of  eight  persons  by  means  of  water;  »»  In  this 
particular  point  of  view,"  says  he,  "  there  is  a  resemhl.in -e 
between  baptism  and  the  deluge. — Noah  was  preserved  by 
water — We  are  saved  by  baptism;  but  I  do  not  mean  tlic 
external  right  here,  but  the  thing  signified  by  it;  1  meaa 
the  stipulation  of  a  good  conscience,  a  sincere  engagement 
to  be  the  Lord's.  Phis  saves  us  by  the  ns'irr'-  tmn  of 
Christ  from  the  dead.     As  surely  as  ISouli  aud  his  lawUj 


8 


were  borne  up  by  the  waters  and  preserved  from  ruin;  as 
surely  as  Christ  died  and  rose  again,  so  surely  shall  they, 
who  are  cleansed  by  liis  blood  and  sanctified  by  his  spirit 
(the  thij)§*  sif^riificd  by  baptism)  be  saved." 

Hence  v/e  sec  tliat  baptism  is  intended  to  he  used  in  the 
Church  of  Jesiis  Cbrist  for  tlic  purpose  of  representing  the 
great  truths  of  Christianity,  and  strengthening  the  faith  of 
t!ie  Cliurcli.  It  is  thus  calculated  to  encourage  ti»e  diligent 
use  of  that  di3ci|)Iiiie  which  has  been  established  in  the 
church  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  the  faithful  instruction  of  all 
who  have  been  initiated  into  the  school  of  Christ. 

These  few  remarks,  while  they  serve  in  some  degi-ee  to 
explain  the  nature  and  design  of  baptism,  show  that  it  was 
intended  to  be  perpetual.  We  are  as  much  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  objects  of  sense,  as  the  primitive  christians 
were;  these  objects,  when  used  to  represent  spiritual  things, 
are  as  well  calculated  as  ever,  to  bring  them  home  to  us 
with  a  powerful  impression;  and  in  this  day,  we  as  much 
need  the  benefits  of  this  ordinance  as  they  did  of  old.  The 
reason  of  the  institution,  then,  still  continues. — Besides, 
to  the  words  of  institution,  our  Saviour  annexes  a  promise, 
which  shews  that  he  had  in  view,  not  only  the  apostles, 
but  those  who  should  succeed  them;  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you, 
always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  But  further,  the 
apostles,  during  the  whole  course  of  their  ministry,  at  least 
as  far  as  the  record  goes,  administered  baptism;  and  there 
is  not  an  intimation  in  scripture  that  the  rite  should  be 
discontinued.  In  one  case,  (see  Acts  x.  — )  we  know  that 
Peter  baptised  a  company  of  persons  after  the  Holy  Spirit 
had  descended  on  them.  And  this  shows  that  the  ordi- 
nance was  not  a  mere  emblem,  to  be  used  only  until  the 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  should  be  more  fully  understood. 
In  truth,  every  man  who  is  authorised  to  go  forth  and  preach 
the  gospel,  as  a  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  authorised  to 
adnunister  baptism.  And  if  it  is  his  duty  to  do  this,  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  people  to  submit  to  the  ordinance. 


But  it  ou2:lit  to  be  understood,  t!iat  there  is  no  mystcn- 
oils  viitiic  in  this  rite,  in  constfjucnce  of  which  grarc  is 
bestowed.  A  person  in  a  state,  of  condemnation,  iminedi- 
aloly  before  baptism,  is  in  a  state  ofcondemnation  immcdi- 
utely  after.  In  other  words,  baptism  does  not  confer 
j^race.  This  is  evident,  in  the  case  of  Simon  Magus — al- 
tliongh  l)apti«ed  by  the  hands  of  an  apostle,  he  was  aftcr- 
\Aards  declared  to  be  *<  in  tlie  giill  (jf  bitterness,  and  in  the 
bonds  of  iniquity."  Baptism  is  a  part  of  that  great  sys- 
tem of  instrumentality  which  God  lias  appointed  for  the  re- 
covery of  man  from  sin,  and  his  everlasting  salvation. — 
And  when  employed,  according  to  the  intention  of  the 
Head  of  the  Church,  there  is  reason  to  expect  his  blessing. 

This  remark  is  offered,  bccunsc  superstitious  notions 
concerning  the  efficacy  of  any  external  observances  have 
done,  and  are  calculated  to  do  unspeakable  mischief  in  tho 
world  and  in  the  church.  Mere  outward  things  arc  sub- 
stituted for  repentance,  faith,  and  holy-living;  a  vain 
confidence  is  generated,  and  men  bLJieve  that  they  are  re- 
generated, and  in  the  favour  of  dxl,  when  in  fact— they 
have  only  complied  with  a  cerc:;j(>ny!  But  it  ought  to  be 
laid  to  heart,  that  nothing  will  sc(  u;c  our  salvation,  but  that 
regeneration  and  purity  w  hicli  baplisn:  represents.  We  must 
be  born  of  the  Spirit,  or  wc  never  sb&ll  seethe  kingdom  of 
God.  We  may  administer  and  receive  ordinances  in  the 
true  apostolic  mode,  (if  that  can  be  ascertained,)  and  yet 
have  no  part  nor  lot  in  the  salvation  of  God,  For  saith 
our  blessed  Saviour,  *'  Verily,  vorily,  I  say  unto  you,  un- 
less a  man  be  born  again^  he  cannot  enter  into  tho  kingdom 
of  Heaven.'' 


10 
PAllT  IL 

THE    SUBJECTS    OF    EAPTISM. 

Having  very  briefly  enquired  into  tlic  nature  of  baptism/ 
the  next  question  is,  "  To  whom  is  baptism  to  be  adminis- 
tered?" The  answer  given  to  the  question  in  the  Assem- 
bly's Catechism,  contains  what  is  believed  to  be  the  truth, 
accordin.^to  scripture:  "  Baptism  is  not  to  be  administer- 
ed to  any  that  are  out  of  the  visible  church,  and  so  stran- 
gers to  the  covenant  of  promise,  till  they  profess  their  faith 
in  Christ,  and  obedience  to  him;  but  infants  descending 
from  parents,  either  both  or  but  one  of  them,  professing' 
faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to  him,  arc,  in  thivt  respect, 
within  the  covenantj  and  are  to  be  baptised." 

Respecting  the  first  general  proposition  contained  in  the 
answer,  it  is  observed,  that  it  is  supported  by  the  practice 
of  the  a])ostles:  They  appear  to  have  required  a  profes- 
sion of  faith  of  all  rvho  applied  to  them  for  baptism;  at 
least  what  was  equivalent  to  a  profession.  No  difference 
was  made  between  Jews  and  Gentiles.  The  cases  of  the 
tjunuch,  of  Cornelius,  of  Lydia,  and  of  the  Jailor  are  all 
in  point.  To  this  it  may  be  added,  that  as  far  as  the  lan- 
guage of  otir  Saviour  goes  on  the  subject,  He  supports  the 
doctrine,  that  nt)ne  who  are  capable  of  believing,  ought  to 
be  baptised  without  a  profession  of  faith:  "  He  that  be- 
lieves and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved." 

But  farther,  the  proposition  is  supported  by  the  vie\r 
^  which  has  been  given  of  the  nature  of  baptism.  It  is  the 
initiatory  ordinance  of  the  church;  and  pledges  ti»e  recipi- 
ent to  submission  to  that  course  of  instruction  which  th© 
head  of  the  church  has  appointed.  Now  faith  regards  Je- 
sus Christ  as  the  great  prophet  of  God,  and  is  a  necessary- 
element  in  that  docility  and  humbleness  of  mind  required 
of  a  scholar  in  the  school  of  Christ:  Man,  however,  can- 
not judge  the  heart.  A  credible  profession  then,  that  is  a 
profession  not  contradicted  by  any  thing  in  the  general  tenor 


li 

of  the  conduct,  is  all  that  a  minister  of  the   gospel  or  a 
chiirrh  can  require. 

As  tliis  doctrin<^  is  not  a  matter  of  dispute  or  doubt,  it  is 
wnnecftssary  to  emph.y  farther  time  in  its  sui)po!t.  It  i? 
well,  howovcr,  to  caution  those,  who  undertake  to  deter- 
mine whether  a  candidate  for  baptism  ought  t(»  be  received, 
not  to  be  too  percmntory  in  their  decisions.  Great  injury 
may  be  done  to  ignorant  and  inconsiderate  persons,  by  the 
supposition,  that  the  vote  of  a  church  or  a  church-session, 
or  the  declaration  of  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  authorative- 
ly  decides  that  thev  are  believers.  It  may  induce  a  secu- 
rity and  self-confidence,  fiital  to  the  best  interests  of  th* 

soul 

The  next  proposition  contained  in  the  quotation,  froTP 
the  Assembly's  C;\techism,  may  be  thus  briefly  expressed— 
The  child  of  a  hdicvbi';  parent  on^ht  to  be  baptised.  The 
reader  is  requested  to  consider  the  following  view  of  the 
subject;  to  compare  tho  whole  with  the  scriptures:  and  with 
hum:.le  praver  to  Almighty  Gr.d  for  direction,  to  Judge  for 
himself.  As  the  subject,  however,  is  disputed  between  sincere 
christians,  let  no  one  be  precipitate  and  dogmatical.-This 
caati..n  is  given,  while  it  is  known,  that  in  omo  irably  the 
majoritv  of  christians  embraces  the  doctrine  vindicated  in 
the  following  pages.  The  caution  proceeds  from  no  doubt 
resting  on  the  writer's  mind;  but  from  a  love  of  modera- 
ion  I  .d  bu  nilitv.  a;.  I  a  dislike  of  their  contraries. 

Before  proceeding  directly  to  the  proof  of  the  proposi- 
tion, an  observation  or  two  will  be  offered  on  the  analogy 
between  the  consitution  of  nature,  and  the  doctrine  ot  the 
Bihle  on  this  subject.  When  God  established  what  is  call- 
ed t!ie  Covenant  of  Works  with  Adam,  the  condition  of  all 
his  posterity  was  connected  with  his  conduct.  We  km»w 
that  he  sinned,  and  that  all  died  in  him;  (see  Rom.  v.  12- 
19.)  And  there  is  every  reason  to  believe,  that  had  Adam 
obeved,  all  would  have  lived  through  him.     Mow,  although 


i2 

this  covenant  has  been  abolished,  yet  there  is  a  Hjost  intir 
mate  connection  between  the  nalui-fil,  civil  and  moral  con- 
dition of  parents  and  children.  This  remark  niii^ht  be  il- 
lustrated by  innumerable  instances.  Ordinarily,  the  chil- 
dren of  weak,  sickly  parents,  are  themselves  weak  and  sick- 
ly; those  of  ignorant  parents  grow  up  in  ignorance. 

Tihe  children  of  the  poor,  are  poor;  of  the  profligate,  are 
abandoned;  of  the  degraded,  are  despised;  of  the  honoura- 
ble, are  respected;  and  so  on  almost  witliout  end.  There 
is  wisdom  and  benevolence  in  this  appointment.  It  is  in- 
tended to  make  use  of  tiie  parental  affection — perhaps  the 
strongest  and  most  inextinguishable  affection  of  the  hu- 
man heart,  in  support  of  virtue  and  piety.  This  connec- 
tion is. apparent  in  the  affairs  of  religion.  Ordinarily,  the 
children  of  heathens,  aie  heathens;  of  Mahometans,  arc 
Mahometans;  of  Jews,  are  Jews;  and  of  christians,  are 
christians.  The  word  christians  here  is  used  in  the  gene- 
ral loose  and  comprehensive  sense  of  the  term.  Yet,  while 
the  idea  that  religion  is  propagated  by  ordinary  genera- 
lions  is  rejected,  it  is  maintained  that  there  is  a  great  and 
very  perceptible  difference  between  the  moral  condition  of 
the  children  of  truly  pioiis  parents,  and  of  nominal  profes- 
sors, who  want  only  just  religion  enough  to  carry  them  to 
heaven.  Now,  considering  tlie  analogy  which  subsists  be- 
tween nature  and  revelation,  it  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered 
at,  if  the  great  Head  of  the  Church,  wlio  is  also  the  au- 
thor of  nature,  has  made  use  of  the  intimate  connection, 
which  subsists  between  parents  and  children,  in  subservi- 
ence to  his  purposes  of  mercy;  and  has  made  the  condition 
of  parents,  in  relation  to  the  Church  of  Christ,  to  bear  on 
tlie  condition  of  children.  Why  should  it  be  thought  metre 
wonderful  or  unreasonable,  that  children  should  be  parta- 
kers of  superior  advantages,  or  entitled  to  higher  privileges, 
because  their  parents  are  members  of  the  church  of  Christ, 
than  that  their  civil  or  intellectual  condition  should  be  bet- 
ter, (as  iu  fact  it  is)  because  they  are  descended  of  parents 


18 


iiistin.cfiiislicd  in  tin'  state,  or  ricivatcd  by  e<lucati()n?  Tliose> 
howcvrr,  arc  hints  thrown  ont  for  the  consiiK-ration  »»f  the 
reader.  It  is  to  tlie  bible  that  we  look  for  information  and 
authority  on  this  nuuli  a.qitated  question. 

And  here  the  original  constit  ution  of  tlje  Church  of  God 
deniunds  attention.  By  the  church  of  (iod  we  m-^an  what 
isordinarily called  thewsiftfeciiurch;  namely,  that  associa- 
ti.)n  into  whicli  persons  are  admitted  who  are  recognized 
as  churcli  members.  The  N>  estminster  cunfession  says 
that  «  it  consists  of  all  those  througliout  the  world,  tiiat 
pi'ofess  the  true  religion,  together  with  their  childi't'ti.'* 
(Cii.  XXV.  §.  2.)  Now  such  an  association  must  have  some 
mode  by  which  members  should  be  initiated,  and  some 
rules  for  thrir  regulation  and  good  government.  This  is 
too  obvious  to  require  illustration.  And  it  may  help  in  di'- 
tcrmining  the  question — When  was  the  cliurcii  organiz  ul? 

In  looking  into  the  New  Testament  we  find  that  the  term 
Church,  when  first  introduced  is,  used  without  explana- 
tion, in  a  way  that  shows  it  to  have  been  quite  familiar  to 
the  people  of  that  time.  Matt.  xvi.  13.  ♦*  'I'hou  art  Peter, 
and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,"  6cc.  xvii.  17. 
««  And  if  he  shall  neglect  to  hear  them,  tell  it  unto  the  Church: 
but  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be  unto  thee  as 
a  heathen  man  and  a  publican."  It  seems  manifest  from 
this  phrase(dogy  that  the  word  Church  conveyed  n«»  new 
idea  to  the  disciples  of  our  Savour.  This  appears  too,  from 
the  words  of  Stephen,  (Acts,  vii.  38.)  «  This  is  he  that 
was  hi  the  church  in  the  wilderness."  In  fact,  the  Greek 
word  rendered  church  {exxTy-aLO)  corresponds  with  the 
Uebrew  term — (^Hp)  I'cndered  congregation^  and  occur- 
curring  so  frequently,  that  an  enumeration  of  the  passages 
would  be  tedious.  And  the  English  phrase.  Church  of 
God  is  a  liberal  rendering  of  the  Greek  exxTyiCia  Sea;  which 
is,  again,  a  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew  niH*  /Hp. 

C 


14 


In  fact,  a  great  part  of  the  phrasenlo.^y  of  tlie  New  Tes- 
tament is  derived  from  the  old;  ami  it  is  inipossiiile  to  read 
many  passages  of  the  former  intelligibly,  without  an  inti- 
mate acquaintance  with  the  latter.     The  complex  idea  con- 
Teyed  by  the  word  church,   cannot  be  adequately    under- 
stood without  reference  to  the  old  scriptures.      This  wiU 
appear  strange  to  thi)se  who  have  taken  up  the  opinion  that 
the  church  was  organized  by  our  Saviour   when  oi  earth. 
That  this  is  not  true,  fi)l!ows  from  what  has  been  said. — 
But  the  apostle  Paul  decides  the  point,  when,  speaking  of 
the  casting  off  of  the  Jews,  and  the  admission  of  the  Gen- 
tiles into  the  church  of  God,  he  says,  Rom.  xi.  17:    "  And 
if  some  of  the  branches  be  broken  off,  and  thou  being  a 
wild  olive-tree,  wert  grafifed  in  among  them,  and  with  them 
partakest  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  the  olive-tree;  boast  not 
against  the  branches."      The  wild  olive  here  represents 
the  gentiles;  the  native   branches,   the  Jews.      Of  these 
«*  some  were  broken  off;"  and  "  among  them*^  the  wild  olive 
was  «  graffed."     Were  not  the  gentiles  brought  into  the 
church  by  this  engraffing?     If  so,  what  was  the  condition 
of  the  '*  natural  branches"  among  which  they  were  graf- 
fed— Were  they  not  also  in  the  church  of  God?     But  as  few 
deny  that  God  liad  a  church  before  the  incarnation  of  Christ, 
this  subject  will  not  be  insisted  on. — The  question  then  re- 
curs, when  was  the  visible  cliurch — that  is  a  church  admit- 
ting members  by  external  rites,  and  adopting  some  princi- 
ples common  to  every  association  that  is  to  be  held  toge- 
ther— when  was  this  church  organized?      It  was  not  by 
John  the  baptiser.     He  pretended  to  no  such  authority;  and 
in  truth,  was  a  Jew,  conforming,  during  the  course  of  his 
ministry  to  the  Jewish  ritual,  and  embodying  no  distinct 
society. — It  is  not  imagined  that  any  of  the  prophets  or- 
ganized the  church  of  God.     In  a  word,  we  first  find  the 
institution  in  the  days  of  Abraham.     God  entered  into  co- 
venant with  him;  constituted  him  the  father  of  the  faithful; 
and  he  received  ^^  drcumcision)  as  a  seal  of  th^  righteous- 


15 


WEss  OP  FAITH."  From  the  brgimiing,  there  was  only 
one  way  of  salvation — thai  is  throiiji^h  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
But  there  was  mi  risihlc  church  until  God  had  a|)jK)intcd 
a  visible  si^n  and  seal  of  that  riijhteousness  by  whic  li  he 
would  pronounce  a  sinner  just;  and  glorify  himself  in  his 
salvation.  It  was  tlien,  that  Clod  enj^aged  to  be  a  God  to 
Abraham  ami  his  seed;  and  appointed  him  a  fatherofmany 
nations — But  on  this  subject  the  fcdiowing  <piotation  from 
the  Ckristia\Cs  Magazine  is  offered  to  the  consideration  of 
the  I'eader. 

<»  By  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham  he  acquired  the 
preroj^ative  of  bein;^  the  »« father  of  many  nations.^*  This 
article  is,  of  itself,  a  dcmojistration  that  the  covenant  was 
of  a  much  wider  extonr  than  all  the  literal  descendants  of 
Abraham  in  the  line  of  Jacob  put  together.  They  never 
did  make  but  one  nation.  Tliere  is  a  marked  distinction  be- 
tween them  and  these  ♦<  many  nations;"  who  are  evidently 
the  same  with  «  all  the  families  of  the  earth,"  that  were 
to  be  blessed  in  Abraham.  The  apostle  Paid  interpi-ets 
the  plirasc  by  anotiier;  liis  being  "  the  heir  of  the  world;** 
and  |)ercmptorily  denies  its  restriction  to  the  literal  seed, 
Rom.  iv.  13,  16,  ir. 

"The  ari;;ument  is  short.  Al>raham's  seed  comprehends 
all  those  of  whom  he  is  the  father:  but  he  is  the  fatlicr  «)1' 
many  nations;  therefore,  these  many  nations  are  to  be 
accounted  as  his  seed.  Again:  the  covenant  was  made 
with  Abraham  and  with  his  seed:  therefore,  the  covenant 
embraces  these  majiy  nations  who  are  included  in  his  seed. 
This  covenant  was  afRrmed  in  an  extra(»dinary  manner; 
viz.  by  the  rite  o( circumcision:  this  saith  God,  is  my  covenant 
■which  ye  shall  keep  betireen  me  and  you,  and  thy  seed  after 
tliee^  every  man  child  among  you  shall  be  circumcised.  The 
uses  of  this  rite  were  two. 

*'  First.  It  certified  to  tlie  seed  of  Abraham,  by  a  token 
in  the  flesh  of  their  males,  that  the  covenant  with  their 
great  progenitor  was  in  force;  that  they   were   under  its 


16 


lull  opprntion;  and  entitled  to  all  thtJ  benefits    iinmediately 
derivi'd  from  it.     But  circumcision  iiad  a  further  use;  forj 

Secondly,  The  apostle  Paul  informs  us  that  it  was  a  seal 
©/■fAe  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OT  THE  TAiTH  wJiicIi  Mraliaju  Jiud 
being  yet  undrcumcised,  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  alt 
them  that  believe,  thoughthey  be  not  circumcised;  that  righte- 
ousness MIGHT  BE  IMPUTED  unto  thevi  also.  Rom.  iv.  11, 
In  this  connexion  it  certified, 

"  That  Abrahacn  was  justified  hy  faith: 

f<  That  the  doctrine  and  the  privilege  of  the  "righteous- 
ness by  faith,"  \Aere  to  be  perpetuated  among  his  seed  by 
the  operation  of  God's  covenant  with  him: 

*«  That  the  justification  of  a  sinner  is  by  faith  alone: 
«  ri,ij;htousness'*  being  '<  imputed"  to  «  all  them  that  be- 
Ueve,'''  and  to  them  only;  who  by  the  very  fact  of  their  he- 
lieving,  become,  in  the  highest  sense,  children  of  Abraham, 
and  pre  accordingly  blessed  with  him. 

<*  While,  therefore,  the  sign  of  circumcision  was  in  every 
circumcised  person,  a  seal  of  God's  covenant  with  Abra- 
ham and  with  his  seed,  it  was  to  all  who  walked  in  the  faith 
of  Abraham  a  seal  of  their  personal  interest  in  that  same 
righteousness  hy  which  Abraham  was  justified. 

««  From  these  general  premises  the  conclusion  is  direct 
and  ir^-efragable,  that  the  covenant  with  Abraham  was  de- 
signed to  assure  the  accomplishment  of  the  second  great 
promise  made  fo  him  while  he  was  yet  in  Ur  of  the  Chal- 
dees;  and  that  the  effect  of  it  was  to  bring  him  and  his 
family,  with  all  who  should  join  them  in  a  kindred  profes- 
sion, into  a  church  estate,  i.  e.  was  a  covenant  ecclesiastical, 
by  which  Jehovah  organized  the  visible  church,  as  one  dis- 
tinct spiritual  society;  and  according  to  which  all  his  after 
dealings  with  her  were  to  be  regulated.  Hitherto  she  had 
been  scattered,  and  existed  in  detached  parts.  Now  it  was 
the  gracious  intention  of  God  to  reduce  her  into  a  com- 
pact form,  that  she  might  be  prepared  for  the  good  things 
to  cume.     Since  Abraham  was  designated  as  the  man  from 


17 

wliom  llio  MRSSIVH  was  to  spritii^;  sinrc  lie  Imd  sicjnally 
glDi'ilicd  the  liOi'il's  veracity,  not  sta^-.^eiiuy;  at  liis  pro- 
niis<'  tliroiijL:;h  unbelief,  he  selected  this  his  servant  as  tho 
(avoiiied  man  in  whose  family  he  would  coinnjence  the  or- 
ganization of  that  (  hnivh  in  which  he  designed  to  perpe- 
tuate the  I'ighteousness  of  faitli.  With  this  church,  as  witli 
the  whole^  composed,  in  the  first  instance,  of  Abraham's 
family,  and  to  he  encreased  aftei-wai'ds  by  the  addition  of 
all  sucii  as  slionid  own  liis  faitli,  was  tlic  covenant  made. 
Tills  is  tjiat  covenant  after  which  we  are  cnr|uiring. 

**  I  his  covenant  has  luwei'  been  annulled.  The  proof  of 
the  atlirmativc  lies  upon  the  alHrmer.  When?  Where? 
antl  by  wh<»m  was  the  act  for  annulling  it  promulgated? 
TIm'  **  vanishing  away"  of  the  ceremonial  law  has  nothitig 
to  do  with  the  Abraliamic  covenant,  but  to  illustrate,  con- 
firm, and  diffuse  its  blessings.  "J'lie  foi-mer  was  a  tempo- 
rary constitution,  superadded  for  the  purpose  of  giving  ef- 
fect to  some  |)rnvisions  of  the  latter,  smd  expired  by  ifs  own 
liinitation.  The  apostle  Paul  refistes  the  notion  that  the 
introduction  of  the  ceremonial  law,  coul«l  at  all  prejudice 
the  pre-existing  covenant  with  Abruhan);  Gal.Wx.  15-17. 
Ajid  if  not  its  commencement,  why  its  termination?  And  if 
the  abolishing  of  the  ceremonial  law  docs  not  infer  the  ces- 
sation of  the  Abraliamic  covenant,  there  is  not  a  shadow 
of  cither  proof  or  presunijition  that  it  has  ceased.  If  there 
is,  let  it  be  produced.  But  not  to  rest  the  matter  here, 
we  may  observe, 

«  Ist.  That  the  promise  of  Abraham's  being  a  father  of 
many  nations,  who  are,  therefore,  his  seed,  never  was,  nor 
could  be  fulfilled,  before  the  Christian  dispensation.  The 
apostle  Paul  was  certainly  of  this  mind;  for  he  proves  the 
calling  of  the  Gentiles  from  Abi*aham's  covenant;  and  if 
the  calling  of  the  Gentiles  to  be  fellow-heirs  in  the  clairch 
of  God  with  ihc  literal  descendants  of  the  patriarch,  was 
grounded  upon  this  covenant,  this,  again,  shows  that  they 


18 


belong  to  that  seed  with  whimi  it  was  ma(i(^  ami,  con- 
sequently, it  is  in  full  force  and  virtue  to  this  hour.  The 
apostle  presses  this  point  with  great  ai-dour;  and  places  it 
before  us  in  various  lights.  If  ye  be  CltrisfSf  says  he  '»  then 
"  are  ye  Mrahani's  seed;  and  heirs  according  to  the  iwomiseJ^ 
"What  promise?  Not  simply  the  promise  of  eternal  life  in 
Christ.  There  was  no  necessity  u^  Wm^iv^  being  Abraham's 
seed  to  inherit  this  promise — but  manifestly,  the  promise 
of  Abraham's  covenant  to  which  they  were  entitled  in  vir- 
tue of  their  being  liis  seed:  i.  e.  the  promise /wi7i  he  a  God 
unto  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee.  If,  then,  they  who  are 
Christ's  are  Abraham's  seed;  and  being  so  are  heirs  ac- 
cording to  the  promise;  the  covenant,  containing  the  pro- 
mise, is  in  full  virtue,  as  they  belong  to  the  seed  with  which 
it  was  made. 

"  2d.  If  the  Abrahamic  covenant  is  no  longer  in  force,  the 
church  of  God,  as  a  visible  public  society,  is  not  in  any 
sense,  connected  with  him  by  covenant-relation.  This  may 
weigh  light  with  those  who  discard  the  doctrine  of  a  visi- 
ble Catholic  church;  but  it  draws  much  deeper  than  they 
suspect.  The  whole  administration  of  the  covenant  of 
grace  proceeds  upon  the  principle  that  there  is  such  a 
church.  All  the  ordinances  are  given  to  it;  all  the  promis- 
es arc  made  to  it.  To  the  elect,  as  such,  they  are  not,  can- 
not be  given.  The  application  of  them  would  be  impossi- 
ble without  a  special  revelation:  and  the  whole  administra- 
tion of  the  covenant  of  grace,  by  visible  means  would  be  at 
an  end.  Nor  is  a  single  instance  to  be  found,  excepting  in 
virtue  of  immediate  revelation,  in  which  the  Lord  ever 
gave  an  ordinant  e  or  a  promise  to  particular  churches. — 
They  always  receive  their  piivileges  in  virtue  of  their  be- 
ing parts  of  the  church  universal.  Now  this  church  uni- 
versal which  is  the  body  of  Christ,  the  temple  of  his  Spi- 
rit, the  depositary  of  his  grace,  stands  in  no  coveilant  re- 
lation to  God,  in  her  public  character,  if  tiie  covenant  with 
Abraham  is   annulled.      For  if  she  does,  then   another 


19 


covenant  lias  l»ccn  nuulo  with  her.  But  no  such  covenant  has 
bet'ii  niade.  'I'lic  new  covenant  which  the  Lord  promised 
to  make  with  her  at  the  introduction  of  the  evanj^elical  dis- 
pensation, was  to  siijii icede,  not  the  Ahrahamic,  hut  tiie 
Sinai  covenant.  It  is  so  far  from  setting  aside,  tliat  it  im- 
plies, and  ewtahlishes  tlie  former;  for  it  is  promised  to  her 
as  that  rhiirc  h  whidi  was  organized  and  perpetuated  un- 
der Abrahanrs  covenant.  If,  therefore,  that  covenant  is 
removed,  and  no  other  has  replaced  it,  the  church,  in  her 
social  capacity,  is  further  off  from  God  tlian  she  was  under 
the  law;  and  all  the  mercies  to  which,  in  that  capacity,  she 
once  had  a  claim,  are  swept  away.  But  this  is  impossible. 
In  fact,  the  scriptures  uniformly  suppose  the  existence  of 
such  public  federal  relations:  and  abound  with  promises 
gi'owing'  out  of  them.  Thus  speaks  the  prophet — "  Tiie 
redeemer  shall  c*)me  to  Zion,  and  unto  them  that  tuin  from 
transgression  in  Jacob,  saith  the  Lord.  As  for  me,  this  is 
my  covenant  with  them,  saith  the  Lord:  my  Spirit  that  is 
upon  thee,  ami  my  words  which  1  have  put  in  thy  mouth, 
shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of 
thy  seed,  nor  out  of  the  m;>uth  of  thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the 
Lord,  from  henceforth  and  forever." — Is.  Iix.21,  22. 

"  This  is  a  prediction  of  JNew  Testament  times:  so  the 
apostle  applies  it.  Hum.  xi.  26,  And  he  aj)plies  it  to  the 
recovery  of  the  Jews,  winch  has  not  yet  happened.  The 
covenant,  therefoi'e,  is  in  force,  and  it  operates  through  the 
medium  of  Gentile  Converts;  the  Lord's  Spirit  has  long 
ago  departed  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Jews.  But  the  prom- 
ise was  made  to  tlie  churcli,  in  her  covenanted  character; 
her  members  in  constant  succession  arc  the  "  seed"  out  of 
whose  mouth  the  divine  Spirit  shall  not  depart;  and  when 
the  J«'W3  arc  restored,  they  will  be  brought  into  this  very 
covenanted  church,  and  be  again  recognized  as  a  part  of 
the  »<  seed."  But  why  multiply  words?  There  is  no  ex- 
plaining of  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the  inspii-ed  writers 


m 

to  tlie  covcnJint  of  Abraliani,  nor  any  propriety  iil  their  rea- 
soning, if  it  is  not  of  perpetual  operation. 

"  3tl.  In  discussing  the  great  question  concerning  the  re- 
jection of  the  Jews,  the  vocation  of  the  Gentiles,  and  tlie  fu- 
ture restoration  of  tlic  former,  the  apostle  reasons  upon 
principles  which  are  most  false  and  impertinent,  if  the! 
Abrahamic  covenant  has  ceased.     Rom.  xi.  17-24. 

"  He  tells  the  Gentiles  that,  they  were  *«  a  wild  olive 
tree;"  and  that  the  Jews  were  the  <'  good  olive  tree" — This 
cannot  refer  to  their  natural  state  as  sinners  before  God; 
for  in  this  respect  there  was  no  «  difference" — nor  to  their 
state  as  sinners  saved  by  grace;  for  from  this  state  there 
is  no  excision;  it  can  refer  to  nothing  but  their  visible 
church  estate;  i.  e.  to  their  public  relation  to  Go«l  as  a  co- 
Tenanted  society.  What,  then,  was  tiiis  •'«  good  olive  tree," 
from  which  the  Jewish  branches  were  '•  broken  off;"  while 
the  Gentiles  were  "  grafied  in?"  Evidently,  the  visible 
church  organized  nnder  the  covenant  made  with  Ahiaham. 
There  was  no  other  from  which  the  Jews  could  be  cast  off. 
The  ceremonial  law  was  superceded.  It  was  no  excision 
at  all  to  be  cut  off  from  a  constitution  wdiich  did  not  exist;  nor 
could  the  Gentiles  be  introduced  into  it.  But  what  says 
the  apostle?  That  the  "  olive  tree"  was  cut  down  or  root- 
ed up?  That  it  had  withered  trunk  and  branrh?  Or  was 
no  longer  the  care  of  the  divine  planter?  Nothing  like  it! 
He  asserts  the  continuance  of  the  olive  tree  in  life  and  vi- 
gour; the  excision  of  some  worthless  branches;  and  the  in- 
sertion of  new  ones  in  their  stead.  *'  Tiiou,"  says  he,  ad- 
dressing the  Gentile,  "  partakest  of  the  root  and  fatness 
of  the  olive  tree.  "  Translate  this  into  liss  figurati\e  lan- 
guage, and  what  is  the  import?  That  the  church  of  God, 
his  visible  church,  taken  into  peculiar  relations  to  himself 
by  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  subsists  without  injury  through 
the  change  of  dispensation  and  members.  Branches  in- 
deed may  be  cut  off,  but  the  rooted  trunk  stands  firm,  and 
other  branches  occupy  the  places  of  those  which  arc  lopped 


21 


away.  The  Jews  arc  cast  out  of  the  church,  but  the  church 
perished  not  with  thcni.  Tiicrc  was  still  left  tlic  trunk  of 
the  olive  tree;  tlicre  was  still  fatness  in  its  roots;  it  stands 
in  the  same  fertile  soil,  the  covenant  of  God:  and  the  ad- 
mission of  the  Gentiles  into  the  room  of  the  excommunica- 
ted Jews,  makes  them  a  part  of  that  covenanted  churchy  as 
branches  graffed  into  the  olive  tree  and  flourishing  in  ita 
fatness,  are  identified  with  the  tree.  It  is  impossible  for 
ideas  conceived  by  the  mind  ofman,  or  uttered  in  his  language, 
to  assert  more  peremptorily  the  continuance  of  the  church 
under  that  very  covenant  which  was  established  with  Abra- 
ham and  his  seed.  And  this  doctrine,  understood  before 
the  apostleship  of  Paul,  was  maintained  by  John  the  Bap- 
tist; "  Think  not^^^  cried  he  to  the  multitudes  who  crowded 
around  him,  "  think  not  to  satj  within  yourselves^  We  Iiave 
Abraham  to  our  father:  for  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  God  is 
able  of  these  stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Mraham.  The 
hearers  of  the  baptist,  like  many  modern  professors  of  Chris- 
tianity, supposed  that  the  duration  of  the  covenant  with 
Abraliam,  and  of  the  prerogative  of  the  Jews  as  God's  pe- 
culiar people,  were  the  same.  It  is  a  mistake,  replies  tlie 
second  Elijah,*  you  may  all  be  cast  off;  you  may  all  perish; 
but  the  oath  to  Abraham  shall  not  be  violated.  God  will 
be  at  no  loss  to  provide  "  seed"  who  shall  be  as  much  with- 
in his  covenant  as  yourselves,  even  though  he  should  create 
them  out  of  the  stones  of  the  earth.  The  threat  was  vain:  it 
was  empty  noise;  it  was  turning  the  thunders  of  God  into 
a  scarecrow  for  children,  if  the  covenant  with  Abraham 
was  not  to  survive  the  law  of  peculiarity,  and  be  replenish- 
ed with  other  seed  than  that  which  sprung  from  his  loin§ 
according  to  the  flesh." — [V'ol.  I.  pp.  14G-153.] 

Having  shown  that  the  church  of  God  was  organized  in 
the  days  of  Abraham,  we  next  state  the  fact  that  children 
were  recognized  as  members  of  that  church.  This  fact 
will  not,  and  indeed  cannot  be  disputed.     The  whole  tenor 

of  the  history,  from  the  time  when  the  circumcision  oflsaar 
D 


2% 


was  recorded  to  the  coming  of  our  Saviour,  shows  that  this 
was  the  case.  During  this  long  period  infants  were  admit- 
ted into  the  chur(  h  hy  the  rite  of  circumcision. 

«  That  this  rite  had  a  spiritual  signijicatian  may  appear, 
if  any  douht  is  yet  entertained  on  the  subject,  from  the 
following  passages  of  scripture."  Deut.  x.  16.  ««  Cir- 
cumcise therefore  the  foreskin  of  your  heart,  and  be  no 
more  stiif-nerked,"  Deut.  xxx.  6.  *<  And  the  Lord 
God  will  circumcise  thine  heart,  and  the  heart  of  thy  seed, 
to  lote  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all 
thy  soul,  that  thou  mayest  live.'*  Jer.  iv.  4.  «  Circum- 
cise yourselves  to  the  Lord,  and  take  away  the  foreskins 
of  your  heart,  ye  men  of  Judah,  and  inhabitants  of  Jerusa- 
lem, lest  my  fury  come  forth  like  fire,  and  burn  that  none 
can  quench  it,  bee  ause  of  the  evil  of  your  doings."  It  may 
also  he  remarked,  that  the  term  uncircumcised  is  frequently 
used  in  scripture  to  express  the  opposite  of  this  circumci- 
sion of  tlie  heart — As  in  Leviticus,  xxvi.  41,42.  «  If 
then  their  uncircumcised  hearts  be  humbled,  and  they  ac- 
cept of  the  punishment  of  their  iniquity;  then  will  I  remem- 
ber my  covenant  with  Jacob,  and  also  my  covenant  with 
Isaac,  and  also  my  covenant  with  Abraham  will  I  remem- 
ber." 

«<  In  similar  language,  Jeremiah  says,  «  Behold  their  ear 
is  uncircumcised,  and  they  cannot  hearken."  vi.  10.  Again, 
ix.  26.  He  says,  *'  And  all  the  house  of  Israel,  are  uncir- 
cumcised in  heart."  The  same  expressions  are  found  in 
Ezekiel  xliv.  7,  9. 

«•'  With  these  passages  of  scripture  let  us  compare  some 
in  the  New  Testament.  Rom.  ii.  28,  29,  "  For  he  is  not  a 
Jew,  which  is  one  outwardly;  neither  is  that  circumcision, 
which  is  outward  in  the  flesh;  but  he  is  a  Jew,  which  is  one 
inwardly,  and  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  spi- 
rit, and  not  in  the  letter;  whose  praise  is  not  of  men  but  of 
God.  iii.  1,2.    «  What  advantage  then  has  the  Jew?   And 


96 


what  ])rofit  is  there  of  circiirncision?  Much  every  way; 
chiefly  because  that  unto  thcui  were  romuiitted  the  oracles 
of  God.  30th  vcr,  "  Seeing  that  it  is  one  God  who  shall 
justify  the  circumcision  htj faithy  atui  the  uncircumcision  thrit* 
faith.'*  Rom.  iv.  11-12.  «'  And  he  received  the  sij:;u  of 
circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  I'it^hteousncss  of  the  faith  which 
he  had  bcin,!^  yet  uncircumcised;  that  he  might  be  the  fa- 
ther of  all  them  that  believe,  though  they  be  not  circumcis- 
ed,* that  righteousness  might  be  imputed  to  then)  also:  and 
the  father  of  circumcision,  to  them  who  are  not  only  of  the 
circumcision,  but  who  also  walk  in  the  steps  of  that  faith 
of  our  father  Abraham,  whicli  he  had  being  yet  uncircum- 
cised." Phil.  iii.  10.  •«  For  we  are  the  circumcision,  which 
worship  G')d  in  the  Spirit  and  rejoice  in  Christ  Jc«us,  and 
have  no  confidence  in  the  flesh."  Col.  ii.  11.  "  In  whom 
ye  also  are  circumcised,  with  the  circumcision  made  without 
hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  by  the 
circumcision  of  Christ."  It  may  also  be  remarked  thai, 
in  the  New  Testament,  the  term  unciicumciscd  is  used  in 
the  same  sense  as  in  the  Old;  as  in  Acts  ii.  51.  "  Ye  stifl*- 
necked,  and  uncircumcised  in  heart  an<l  eai*s;  ye  do  al- 
ways resist  the  Holy  Ghost — as  your  fathei's  did,  so  do 
ye."  With  this,  and  the  passages  quoted  above,  may  be 
compared  James  i.  21.  Wherefore  lay  apart  all  filthiness, 
and  sHperJlmty  of  naughtinesSf  and  witli  meekness  receive 
the  ingrafted  word,  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls."  In 
this  text,  the  phrase  superflniiy  of  iiauglitinesSf  may  sound 
strangely.  Is  any  naughtiness  to  be  retained;  that  the  su- 
perfluity of  it  is  to  be  laid  aside?  The  expression  h.is  re- 
ference to  the  rite  of  circumcision,  and  to  tlic  spiritual  im- 
port tiiereof;  and  can  only  be  explained  in  this  way.  To 
a  person  understanding  the  manner  in  which  this  ceremo- 
ny was  pej'formed;  the  corruption  of  nature,  expressed  by 
it;  and  the  sanctifieation  designated;  the  passage  will  ap- 
pear clear. 


24 

«»'The  lite  under  consideration  seems  to  have  been  instiv 
tuted  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  a  corrupt  nature  is 
propagated  by  manj  and  that  this  corruption  must  be  re- 
moved, or  the  sinner  be  made  to  suffer  the  penalty  of  the 
broken  law.  As  it  was  a  painful  and  bloody  rite,  it  aptly 
represented  the  desert  of  sin,  and  the  bloody  sacrifice  which 
was  necessary  for  the  pardon  of  the  sinner.  The  sinful 
nature  represented  by  circumcision  is,  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, called  the  old  man;  and  in  the  epistle  to  the  Eph.  iv. 
22-24,  the  apostle  very  plainly  expresses  the  truth  here 
exhibited  by  a  type;  "That  ye  put  off  concerning  tlie  form- 
er conversation  the  old  man,  which  is  corrupt  according  to 
the  deceitful  lusts;  and  be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  your 
mind;  and  that  ye  put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed 
in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him." — 
This  the  apostle  represents  as  the  amount  of  the  christian 
doctrine.  But  this  is  the  very  thing  represented  by  circum- 
cision; as  will  appear  manifest  by  adverting  to  the  passages 
in  Deuteronomy  already  quoted,  x.  16.  "  Circumcise  the 
foreskin  of  your  heart;  and  xxx.  6.  <f  Tlie  Lord  thy  God 
will  circumcise  thy  heart,  and  the  heart  of  thy  seed,  to  love 
the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  soul, 
that  thou  mayest  live."  The  most  obvious  and  important 
effect  of  regeneration  is,  to  induce  the  supreme  love  of  God; 
this  circumcision  of  the  heart,  then,  to  love  God  in  this 
way,  is  undoubtedly  regeneration.  But  if  circumcision  is 
not  intended  to  express  this  doctrine,  it  would  be  utterly 
improper  to  use  such  language  as  that  of  Moses.  If  far- 
ther evidence  is  necessary,  the  declaration  of  the  apostle 
in  Rom.  ii.  28-29,  already  quoted,  will  be  amply  sufficient. 
«  He  is  not  a  Jew  who  is  one  outwardly,"  &c.  Circumci- 
sion then  implies  tlie  corruption  of  our  nature,  the  punish- 
ment to  which,  in  consequence  of  sin,  we  are  exposed;  and 
the  necessity  of  the  regenerating  ar>d  sanctifying  grace  of 
God.  So  that  a  man  truly  circumcised  in  the  full  scriptu- 
ral sense  of  the  term  is  a  true  member  of  the  church  of  God. 


35 


he  worships  God  in  tlic  spirit,  rejoices  in  Christ  Jesus,  and 
puts  no  confidence  in  tije  flesh. 

«  Again,  we  observe  that  circumcision  is  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  faitii.  This  is  evident  from  the  express 
declaration  of  the  apostle  Paul,  Rom.  iv.  11.  "  He  receiv- 
ed the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith  which  he  had,  being  yet  in  uncircumcision,  k.c.  The 
righteousness  of  faith  is  that  righteousness,  by  which  a  sin- 
ner is  justified  in  the  sight  of  God.  This  is  sometimes  call- 
ed «  the  law  of  righteousness" — llom.  ix.  31.  It  is  else- 
where called  ♦*  the  righteousness  of  God" — Rom.  i.  17,  and 
X.  3.  And  in  Phil.  iii.  9,  it  is  described  as,  "  the  righte- 
ousness which  is  of  God  by  faith."  This  is  a  righteousness 
pointed  out  by  God,  wrought,  and  freely  conferred  by 
him  as  the  God  of  all  grace.  It  is  received  by  the  sinner, 
through  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  At  the  time  when 
circumcision  was  instituted,  an  epitome  of  the  gospel  was 
given  to  Abraham;  by  the  grace  of  God  he  had  been  ena- 
bled to  believe;  and  God  to  encourage  and  strengthen  his 
faith,  added  circumcision  as  a  pledge  of  his  own  faithfulness 
in  the  performance  of  his  promises;  and  as  a  sign  and  seal 
of  that  righteousness  of  faith,  of  which  Abraham  had  been 
made  partaker,  and  through  which  it  was  the  divine  inten- 
tion to  justify  every  one  who  should  be  saved.  Thus  was 
the  gospel,  the  very  identical  gospel  in  which  we  believe, 
preached  to  Abraham.  And  thus  did  God  give  evidence, 
for  the  comfort  of  the  church,  that  the  Messiah,  who  ac- 
cording to  carnal  descent  was  then  in  the  loins  of  Abraham, 
in  the  fulness  of  time  should  come,  and  be  cut  oft'  for  the 
sins  of  the  people.  The  ancient  Jewish  Doctcn-s  under- 
stood this  spiritual  design  of  circumcision,  as  appears  from 
their  customary  saying,  «  A  proselyte  from  the  time  tliat 
he  becomes  a  proselyte,  is  like  a  new  born  infant."  And 
hence,  when  Nicodemus  wondered  at  the  doctrine  of  our 
Lord  concerning  regeneration,  our  Saviour  asked,  "  Art 
tliou  a  Teacher  in  Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things?'' 


m 

«  Farther,  it  will  appear  that  circumcision  was  a  seal  of 
the  covenant  of  grace,  by  adverting  to  the  text  before  quo- 
ted. It  was  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  says  the 
apostle.  And  the  righteousness  of  faith,  is  the  righteous- 
ness which  God  bestows  according  to  the  covenant  of  grace 
and  which  entitles  us  to  its  blessings — But  circumcision  was 
the  seal  of  the  covenant  which  God  in  Christ  made  with 
x\brahani,  therefore  the  Ah  rah  am  ic  covenant  was  the  cove- 
nant of  grace. 

«  Farther,  according  to  the  preceding  account,  circumci- 
sion implied,  and  required  the  exercise  of  faith.  Of  this 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt,  since  it  was  the  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith.  To  deny  this  would  be  to  affirm 
that  circumcision  was  the  seal  of  that  which  was  not  true. 
Accordingly,  when  a  Jewish  parent  offered  a  child  for  cir- 
cumcision, that  parent  did  of  course  make  a  profession  of 
faith  in  the  covenant  promises  of  God;  and  when  a  prose- 
lyte applied  for  this  rite,  it  would  have  been  perfectly  cor- 
rect to  address  him  in  the  identical  words  which  Philip  ad- 
dressed to  the  Eunuch,  "  If  thou  believest  with  all  thine 
heart,  tliou  mayest.'* 

<«  Another  remark  of  importance  is,  that  circumcision 
w'as  the  initiatory  ordinance  into  the  visible  church  of  God 
under  the  former  dispensation. 

<<  When  God  called  Abraham  and  established  the  church 
in  his  family,  circumcision  w^as  instituted.  The  child  of 
every  Hebrew  was,  according  to  divine  command,  to  be 
circumcised.  When  any  person  became  a  proselyte,  this 
rite  was  to  be  adminstered  to  him,  and  his  offspring — so 
that  in  no  case  whatever,  was  an  uncircumcised  male  con- 
sidered a  member  of  the  congregation  of  the  Lord,  that  is 
of  the  visible  church.  The  result  of  the  whole  may  be  thus 
stated — God  established  a  visible  church  in  the  family  of 
Abraham:  circumcision  was, 

«  1.  The  initiatory  ordinance  into  that  church,  and  im- 
plied 


»7 


«  2.  Depravity  of  luiinan  nature,  amUiabiUty  to  punish- 
ment. 

"  3.  Tlic  necessity  of  pardon  [throui^ii    the  blooil  of  thc 

Messiali]  and  of  santifiration  [throui;li  the  Spirit.] 

"  4.  It  was  a  seal  of  the  rigliteousness  of  faith;  and  of 
course 

'<  5.  Of  the  covenant  of  grace.  And  as  such  oblii^od  the 
subjects  of  it  to  a  life  of  holiness  and  new  obedience:  It 
therefore  represented  a  death  unto  sin  and  a  life  unto  holi- 
ness." Virginia  Evangelical  and  Literary  Magazine,  vol. 
I,  pp.  151-155. 

This  subject  has  been  urged  at  sucii  lengtli,  and  almost 
the  same  idea  has  been  repeated,  because  it  has  a  most  im- 
portant bearing  on  the  great  question  under  consideration. 

It  was,  then,  the  appointment  of  God  tliat  the  initiatory 
rite  of  the  church  should  be  ajiplied  to  infants,  from  the  or- 
ganization of  the  cluirch,  until  the  coming  of  Christ.  Our 
blessed  Saviour,  it  is  granted,  made  changes  in  the  exter- 
nal form  of  the  cliurch,  and  particudarly  in  the  initiatory 
ordinance.  But  wliere  is  the  evidence  of  a  change  in  this 
particular?  What  law  of  our  Saviour's  kingdom  excludes 
from  it  those  wiio  had  been  previously  admitted?  An  ex- 
press precept  cannot  be  pointed  to  by  those  who  most  ve- 
hemently contend  for  positive  commands  on  this  subject. 
And  all  the  inferential  reasoning  that  has  ever  been  brought 
forward,  as  far  as  it  proves  any  thing,  proves  that  infants 
ought  no  more  to  have  been  admitted  in  former  times  than 
under  the  present  dispensation.  Is  is  said  that  faith  is  ne- 
cessary to  baptism? — Surely  it  was  as  necessary  in  the  case 
of  circumcision,  which  was  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
I'aith.  Is  it  said  that  baptism  implied  regeneration;  and  il 
is  impossible  to  determine  whether  infants  arc  regenerated 
or  not?  The  same  was  the  case  with  circumcision. — Tlit 
whole  argument  then  comes  into  a  short  compass.      By  the 

APPOINTMENT    OF    GoD,    INFANTS    WERFi    RECOGNIZED  AS 
UEMBEBS     OF    HIS     CUIJRCU:     BUT     THIS      APPOINTMENT 


2» 


HAS  NEVER   BEEN   ABROGATED^    THEREFORE   THEY    ARB 
STILL   TO    BE   RECEIVED. 

But  let  US,  in  the  next  place,  examine  some  passages  in 
the  New  Testament,  which  directly  bear  on  the  subject  of 
Christian  Baptism. 

And  here,  we  begin  with  the  institution  of  this  ordinance. 
This  is  recorded  in  Matt,  xxviii.  19-20.  "  Go  ye  therefore 
and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptising  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghostj 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have 
commanded  you." — Tliis  was  the  institution  of  christian 
baptism.  It  is  true  that  a  rite  thus  designated,  was  used 
before  this  time.  But  it  could  not  have  been  the  initiatory 
ordinance  of  the  christian  church;  because  the  church  in 
its  christian  form  had  not  been  organized.  Our  blessed 
Lord,  regarded  as  to  his  human  nature,  lived  and  died  a  Jew, 
conforming  to  all  the  appointments  of  the  Mosaical  ritual,* 
and  the  Jewish  economy  was  not  abolished  until  Jesus  Christ, 
having  accomplished  his  wurk  by  rising  from  the  dead,  ap- 
peared as  the  head  of  his  church,  and  ordained  new  laws 
for  its  go\  prnmeut  and  discipline.  The  baptism  applied 
to  Jewish  proselytes,  could  not  have  been  the  initiatory  or- 
dinance into  the  church  of  God;  for  circumcision  was  used 
for  that  purpose. — John's  baptism  could  not  have  borne 
that  character.  1.  Because  John  was  a  Jewish  believer, 
and  pretended  to  no  authority  to  make  new  ordinances  in 
the  church.  2.  Because  his  baptism  made  no  recognition 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  (See  Acts.  xix.  2-3.)  3.  Because  the 
church  in  its  christian  form  had  no  existence  in  the  days  of 
John. — The  baptism  administered  by  our  Saviour  and  his 
disciples,  previous  to  his  resurrection,  was  not  the  christian 
baptism  as  afterwards  instituted  by  Christ.  1.  Because  it 
required,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  only  a  profession  of  be- 
lief, that  Christ  was  the  Messiah.  2.  Because,  of  course, 
it  made,  as  in  the  case  of  John's  baptism,  no  acknowledge- 
ment of  the  Holy  Ghost.     3.  It  made  no  abolition  of  th« 


29 


temple  service,  <»r  any  part  «»f  tlic  Jewish  ritual.  Until  our 
Savidiir  c^avc  tlic  A|)()stk's  tlicir  ("oni.nissioii,  the  Conn  of 
the  rluirrh  was  unchan2;pfl.  It  w.ls  theiu  that  appliration 
of  water,  hy  an  authorized  ministry,  in  the  narm?  of  tlic  Fa- 
ther, and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  (ihost,  introduced  persons 
into  the  school  of  Christ,  that  there  they  mi.^ht  he  taught 
to  ohsorve  all  thinc^s  th.it  lie  had  conitnnndod. 

*«  Go^  says  our  Lord,  make  all  nations  disciples,  baptising 
them.  How  arc  we  to  understand  this  conininnd?  How  did 
they  understand  it  to  whom  it  was  addressed?  In  order  to 
niake  this  discovery,  wc  should  not  only  study  the  import 
of  the  words  themselves.  I)ut  also  the  education,  the  opini- 
ons and  even  t!jc  prejudices  of  the  apostles;  for  prejudices 
they  certaitdy  had  at  that  lime,  and  stron.i^  ones  too.  In  a 
word,  we  should  labour  to  place  oui'selves,  as  it  were,  in 
their  very  position,  surrounded  with  all  the  circumstances 
in  which  they  stood  when  they  received  this  injunction.  In 
proportion  as  we  succeed  in  this  attcuijjt,  we  shall  be  likely 
to  ascertain  how  they  understood  the  commission  of  their 
Lord;  and  their  understanding  of  it  will  exhibit  its  infallible 
meaning,  unless  subsequent  evidence  shall  arise  to  prove 
that  they  were  mistaken.  1  lay  this  down  as  a  general 
rule  for  the  explication  of  all  those  parts  of  ancient  records 

which  consist    of  addi'esses  from  one  person  to  another 

If  the  reader  have  any  doubt  of  its  correctness,  I  invite  him 
to  pause  and  examine  it  carefully  before  he  proceed  farther. 
Such  an  examination,  I  am  confident,  will  convince  him 
that  the  rule  is  a  just  one,  and  of  great  importance  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  scriptures. 

"  The  apostles,  then,  could  not  be  ignorant  that  in  all  the 
important  affairs  of  life  it  was  common  for  parents  to  act 
and  engage  in  behalf  of  their  children;  heads  of  families  in 
behalf  of  their  households.  They  knew  that  it  was  common 
for  children  to  he  comprehended  with  their  parents,  in  those 
covenants  which  God  had  at  various  times  made  with  men. 
But  farther;  they  were  Jews,  members  of  the  Jewish  church. 


30 


tlie  adniissiuii  ol' families  into  which  cliurch  was  a  ftiMda^ 
mental  principle  and  an  invariable  practice.  From  the 
founding;  of  that  church  in  the  house  of  Abraham,  the  chil- 
dren and  servants  of  Hebrew  believers  were  uniformly  re- 
ceived and  inclwded  within  it.  And  whereas  a  law  had  been 
given,  for  the  admission  into  that  church  of  proselytes  from 
other  nations,  they  knew  that  by  the  law  the  households  of 
professing  proselytes  were  ailmitted  with  them,  and  were 
equally  subjects  of  the  initiating  ordijmnce.  Nor  had  they, 
so  far  as  we  can  discover,  ever  heard  from  their  master 
any  intimation  that  he  intended  any  change  in  this  matter. 

"  I  have  f.'uther  to  observe  that  it  is  a  fact  well-established 
by  ancient  testimony  that  it  was  a>i  universal  custom 
amongst  the  Jews  to  baptize,  at  the  same  time  that  they  cir- 
cumcised proselytes,  both  parents  and  children.*  That 
this  practice  existed  before  the  coming  of  our  Lord  appears 
certain;  as,  besides  the  testimonies  which  prove  it,  it  is  ut- 
terly incredible  that  the  Jews  should  have  assumed  the  rite 
in  imitation  of  tlie  Christians  whom  they  rancorously  hated 
and  despised.  This  fact  accounts  in  the  best  manner  for  the 
reception  which  John's  baptism  met  with  from  the  Jews. 
It  is  remarkable  that  they  express  no  surprise,  nor  ask  any 
questions,  about  his  baptizing  with  water  as  a  religious  rite. 
They  only  inquire  for  the  autliority  of  his  commission. f 
This  is  inconsistent  with  baptism's  being  a  novelty  among 
them  as  a  sign  of  entering  into  a  new  religious  relation^ 
and  concurs  with  the  other  evidence  to  prove  that  it  was  a 
constant  practice. 

"It  may  be  objected  that  this  Jewish  baptism^  not  being 
founded  or  at  least  clearly  ascertained  by  their  law,  should 


*  "  No  one  is  a  proselyte  until  he  be  circumcised  and  baptised  "  This 
was  a  standing  rule  amongst  the  Jews.  "If,  says  Maimonides,  an  Israel- 
ite find  a  heathen  infant,  and  baptise  him  in  the  name  of  a  proselyte,  be- 
holdi  he  is  a  proselyte." 

I  Johni.  25.     ^ind  they  asked  him,  and  said  unto  him,  why  baptisest  tfmt^ 
then,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias  neither  that  prophef? 


31 

iiotlic  supposed  to  have  any  infliiciuc  on  tlie  minds  of  tht 
Apostles  in  the  nnderstandins:  of  their  ronuuission.  Kul 
this  conclusion  I  cannot  admit.  It  was  a  matter  of  fact 
vith  which  they  must  have,  hcen'well  arfpiaintod;  and  wc 
do  not  find  that  our  Lord  ever  condemned  it.  It  would, 
therefore,  have  its  influence  on  the  minds  of  the  Apostles. 
It  is  not  true,  that  every  Jewish  institution  of  which  wc  do 
not  find  t!.c  divine  authority  in  their  law,  was  implicitly  con- 
demned  hy  our  Lord.  When  and  by  what  authority  were 
the  Jewish  synagoj^ues  instituted?  On  this  subject  the.  Old 
Testament  is  altogether  silmt.  Yet  our  L..rd  s;■A^(^  them 
liis  unequivocal  approbation,  by  constantly  ofilciatins  in 
them.  Nay,  the  government  and  modes  of  worship  of  the 
christian  church  were  in  a  great  ipeasure  conformed  to  the 
model  of  the  svnagogue. 

«  Another  remark,  of  no  little  weight,  presents  itself 
here.  It  was  a  custom  amongst  the  Jews  to  conclude  the  ce- 
lebration of  the  passover  by  eatingbread  and  drinking  wine. 
Of  this  wc  need  no  other  evidence  than  the  account  given 
of  the  last  passover  celebrated  by  our  Lord  with  his  Apos- 
tles.* Now  this  very  Jewish  custom  our  Lonl  solemnly  ap- 
pointed to  be.  a  standing  ordinance  in  his  (iiurch.  When, 
therefore,  the  command  was  given  to  make  disciples  and 
baptize,  would  not  the  Apostles  naturally  understand  it  as 
an  adoption  of  the  Jewish  baptism?  Are  not  the  two  cases 

strongly  analogous? 

Considering  then  the  circumstances  of  the  Apostles,  and 
the  views  of  things  which  they  nmst  have  had,  let  us  sup- 
pose them  to  have  been  divinely  commissioned  to  go  forth 
to  all  the  nations,  and  make  them  disciples  to  Moses,  init.a- 
ting  them  into  that  state  by  circumcision.  Would  they  tiot 
kave  thought  themselves  b..uud  to  receive  ami  <  ircumciso 
the  children  with  their  parents,  the  household   with  their 

•  Luke  xxii.  19,  20.     .tnd  he  took  bread,  and  gave  thank,,  lie    Liknnse 
also  the  cup  qfter  siipper,  L^c 


S2 


believing  heads?  I  think  it  perfectly  evident  that  they 
would.  Now  only  substitute  the  name  of  Christ  for  that  of 
Moses,  and  baptism  for  circumcision,  and  it  becomes  the 
very  commission  contained  in  the  text.  Considering  this, 
together  with  what  we  have  seen  concerning  Jewish  bap- 
tism, must  we  not  conclude  that  tlie  commission  contejnpla- 
ted  the  baptism  of  the  household  of  believers  as  well  as  of 
themselves,  and  that  the  Apostles  so  understood  it? 

*<  Siiould  it  be  objected,  tfiat  so  far  as  any  conclusion 
can  be  formed  from  circumcision  to  baptism,  it  would  only 
warrant  the  baptism  of  males,  as  none  but  males  were  cir- 
cumcised: I  answer  that  the  efficacy  of  circumcision  was 
considered  as  extending  to  females  alsoj*  that  females  are 
as  capable  of  being  baptised  as  males;  that  they  are  disci- 
ples, and  all  discijdes  are  by  the  text  commanded  to  be 
baptised;  and  finally,  that  care  has  been  taken  to  inform 
us  expressly  that  baptism  belongs  equally  to  both  sexes.f 

"  Supposing  the  Apostles  to  have  understood  their  com- 
mission rightly,  there  still  remains  to  be  answered  an  ob- 
jection against  our  conclusion,  I'his  Is  founded  on  the 
meaning  of  the  word  disciple.  It  has  often  been  asserted 
by  our  brethren,  and  that  with  much  confulence,  that  little 
children  being  incafjable  of  being  taught,  cannot  be  made 
disciples;  nay,  that  discipleshin  necessarily  implies  not  on- 
ly a  capacity  of  instruction,  but  actual  previous  instruction. 
But  is  this  assertion  true?  I  acknowledge  that  the  term 
disciple  has  a  relation  to  instruction.  But  it  by  no  means 
implies  universally,  that  he  who  is  called  a  disciple  must 
have  been  previously  instructed.  A  disciple  is  one  who 
puts  himself  or  who  is  put  by  otiicrs  under  the  authority  of 


"  Exod.  xii.  4.  And  if  the  household  be  too  little  for  the  lamb,  let  him  and 
his  neig'hbour  next  unto  his  house  take  it,  and  according  to  the  mimber  of  the 
souls,  &c.  Compared  with  v.  45.— for  no  uncircumcised  person  shall  eat 
thereof. 

■)■  Acts  viii.  12. — They  -were  baptised,  both  mat  and  women 


38 


a  Tcnclicr.  The  word  applies  e«iiially  to  boili  ciibts.  Wt 
at^ree  that  ul'  adults  no  longer  under  the  coiitrcjul  <jf  j)a- 
I'cnts,  no  person  can  be  called  a  disciple  of  Christ  without 
a  profession  of  faith  in  him  as  the  Messiah,  and  of  subjec- 
tion to  his  authority.  But  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  re- 
ception of  children  as  his  disci |des?  How  does  it  oppose 
their  admission  into  his  school,  that  they  may  be  taught  in 
future?  Is  it  fair  reasoning,  that  because  adults  are  not  to 
be  received  witliout  a  |)rorcs.sion  of  voluntary  subjection  to 
Christ,  therefore,  children,  incapable  of  making  such  pro- 
fession, are  to  be  excluded?  I  think  not.  But  1  go  far- 
ther, and  «)bserve  that  there  is  a  text  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment where  little  children  are  manifestly  called  disciples. 
There  was  a  set  of  men  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  who 
went  about  j>ersuading  the  christian  converts,  tiiat  they 
must  needs  be  circumcised  and  keep  the  law.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  they  wished  to  but  den  them  with  the  whole  law 
of  Moses;  and  insisted  particularly  on  circumcision  as  the 
ground  work,  and  that  which  could  give  a  binding  force  to 
the  rest.  Now  this  matter  being  proposed  to  the  Apostles 
and  brethren,  it  was  asserted  by  Peter,  and  afterwards  de- 
termined by  them  all,  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  impose 
this  yoke  upon  the  neck  of  the  disciples.*  Uad  the  false 
teachers  gained  their  object,  it  is  certain  that  the  heavy 
yoke  of  circumcision  would  have  fallen  principally  on  the 
infantile  age.  So  it  had  been  in  the  Jewish  church;  and 
80  it  would  have  been  in  the  christian  church.  Little  chil- 
dren, therefore,  arc  here  called  disciples.  We  may  re- 
mark inoi-eover,  that  this  text  affords  an  obvious  and 
strong  proof  of  our  main  point,  that  the  children  of  profes- 
sing believers  were  received  with  them  into  the  church. 

"  Should  any  besitate  about  infant  disciplesliip,  I  will 
propose  to  their  consideration  this  question;  is  there  any 
thing  moi-e  strange  in  the  denominating  of  little  children 

•  Acts  XV.  10. 


S4 


disciples,  than  in  their  entering  and  being  taken  into  cove* 
nant  with  God,  of  whatever  nature  the  covenant  may  be? 
Yet  this  latter  cannot  be  denied  to  have  taken  place.  Be- 
sides the  great  covenant  made  with  Abraham,*  Moses  has 
left  on  record  a  most  striking  instance  of  it  which  took 
place  under  his  administration.!  On  the  whole,  therefore, 
I  conclude  that  t\\e  Apostles  mast  have  understood  their 
commission  to  enjoin  the  reception  as  disciples,  aiid  conse- 
quently the  baptism,  of  the  household  of  the  believer,  as 
well  as  of  the  believer  himself."  Virginia  Religious  Maga- 
<x>ine,  Vol.  III.  -pp.  35-40. 

This  view  of  the  commission  given  to  the  apostles  pre- 
pares the  way  for  a  consideration  of  the  practice  pursued 
by  them  in  reference  to  the  subject  of  baptism.  This  prac- 
tice we  state  to  have  been  thus: — When  an  unbaptised  adult 
presented  himself  as  a  candidate  for  baptism,  he  was  re- 
quired to  make  a  profession  of  faith  in  Jesus  Christ;  and  on 
this  profession  he  was  baptised:  and  if  he  had  children^  they 
were  baptised  also.  The  former  part  of  the  proposition  is 
not  disputed;  the  latter  is  established  by  the  following 
scripture  facts. 

There  is  a  passage  in  Peter's  sprech,  recorded  in  the 
second  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  which  many 
truly  pious  and  learned  men  have  thought  of  great  weight 
on  tliis  question.  We  only  cite  the  passage  and  pass  on. 
Acts  ii.  39.  *'  For  the  promise  is  to  you,  and  to  your  chil- 
dren, and  to  all  that  are  afar  off,  even  as  many  as  the  Lord 
our  God  shall  call."  An  argument  of  much  strength  might 
be  derived  from  this  text,  in  favour  of  the  application  of 


•  On  this  point  the  reader  is  requested  to  read  Gen.  xvii.  carefully 
throughout. 

f  Deut.  x.\ix.  10,  11,  12.  Ye  stand  this  day  all  of  you  be/ore  the  Lord 
your  God,  your  captains  of  your  tribes,  your  elders  and  your  officers,  ■with  all 
the  men  of  Israel;  your  little  ones,  your  -wives,  and  the  stran^ei'  that  is  in  thy 
camp,  from  the  heioer  of  thy  -wood  unto  the  drawer  of  thy  -water;  that  thou 
shouldst  enter  into  covenant  -with  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  into  the  oath  ivhicfi 
She  Lord  t/iy  God  maketh  luith  thee  thia  day. 


35 


baptism  to  children — but  tiio  discussion  must  not  bo  pi*o*- 
lont;ed. 

Let  us  proceed,  then,  to  the  case  of  Lydia,  i^ecorded  in 
the  Acts,  xvi.  14,  15.  That  this  case  may  be  undcrstf)od, 
it  ouqht  to  be  known  that  Thyatira,  tho  birth  place  of  Ly- 
<lia,  was  a  small  city  in  the  province  of  Lj/dla  in  Asia  Mi- 
nor, and  was  settled  by  a  colony  of  Macedonians.  The 
women  of  tliis  place  were  celebrated  for  tlieir  skill  in  the 
art  of  dyeinj^  purple,  so  famous  in  ancient  times.  Gar- 
ments of  purple  cloth  were  worn  by  the  great  men  and  no- 
bles of  former  days.  The  p(M)r  were  neither  able  to  pur- 
chase them,  nor  were  they  allowed  to  wear  them.  Now 
Lydia  was  a  seller  of  pui'ple.  The  city  of  Thyatira,  in  a 
remote  colony,  did  not  suit  her  trade;  she  thereibrc  remov- 
ed from  it  to  Philippi,  the  metropolis  of  Macedonia,  and 
there  established  herself.  From  the  nature  and  (luality  of 
the  j^oods  in  which  she  traflicked,  a  very  considerable  ca- 
pital was  necessary  to  carry  it  on.  There  is  not  the  least 
probability  that  Lydia  was  a  FtiUar,  strolling  from  town 
to  tow  n,  selling  her  wares  as  she  could.  In  that  period  of 
time,  and  that  part  of  the  world,  it  is  utterly  unlikely  that 
a  woman  would  travel  about  with  an  article  of  commerce, 
more  precious  than  gold,  as  petty  traffickers  do  with  their 
notions  at  present.  Much  less  is  it  likely  that  she 
would  pass  over  the  sea  from  Asia  to  Europe  in  the  way 
of  peddling.  The  brief  account  given  by  tlie  sacred  histo- 
rian, warrants  the  belief  that  Lydia  was  settled  in  Philippi 
in  the  way  of  her  trade.  Ilis  words  are  these — "  And  a 
certain  woman  named  Lydia,  a  seller  of  purple  of  the  city 
of  Thyatira,  who  worshipped  God,  heard  us:  whose  heart 
the  Lord  opened,  that  she  attended  to  the  things  that  were 
spoken  by  Paul.  Arul  when  she  was  baptised  and  her 
household,  she  besought  us  saying,  if  ye  have  judged  me 
to  be  faithful  to  the  Lord,  fome  into  my  house,  and  abide 
there.  And  slie  constrained  us."  The  words  recited  suffi- 
ciently show  that   f  .ydia  was  baptised  on  a   profession  of 


36 


faith:  it  is  equally  true  that  her  household  were  baptised. 
And  to  me  it  seems  clear,  that  it  was  on  the  prof es  si  on  of 
her  faith  that  this  application  of  baptism  was  made.  The 
historian  speaks  of  Lydia's  heart  being  opened;  and  imme- 
diately subjoins,  that  she  and  her  household  were  baptised. 
And  when  Lydia  invited  the  apostles  to  abide  witli  her,  sl»c 
says,  «<  if  ye  have  judged  ME  to  bo  faithful;"  Now,  had 
the  family  of  Lydia  consisted  of  adult  believers,  would  she 
not  most  naturally  have  said,  in  assigning  a  reason  why 
tiie  apostles  should  accept  her  invitation,  "  if  ye  have 
judged  US  to  be  faithful?"  Lydia  was  a  woman  of  busi- 
ness, and  would  frequently  have  her  attention  occupied  by 
the  affairs  of  lier  merchandise.  Had  other  believers  be- 
longed to  her  household,  she  would  scarcely  have  failed  to 
allude  to  them  in  the  invitation.  But  she  did  not. — 
In  a  word,  her  lauguagc  is  precisely  that  of  a  mother,  who, 
according  to  pedobaptist  principles,  had  devoted  herself, 
and  her  household  to  the  Lord,  But  let  us  enquire  what  is 
the  proper  signification  of  the  word  translated,  household. 
The  original  is  OIKOS.  This,  every  scholar  knows,  is 
primarily  a  house;  but  by  a  very  common  figure  of  speech, 
it  is  frequently  put  for  that  w^hich  a  house  contains,  that 
is  a  family.  It  ought  to  be  observed  here,  that  the  word 
family  is  used,  in  distinction  from  the  head  of  that  family. 
Thus  a  father  or  a  mother  says,  /,  and  myfamiltj — My  fam- 
iy  is  at  home — is  from  home^  &;c.  The  case  is  the  same  in 
Greek;  and  universally  the  word  OIKOS  in  the  metapho- 
rical sense  just  noticed,  signifies  the  descendants  of  one 
who  is  named  as  head  of  the  house.  Thus  Matt.  x.  6, 
*'  But  go  ye  rather  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  (oLxa)  of 
Israel."  Here  it  means  the  descendants  of  Jacob,  other- 
wise called  Israel.  See  also  Matt.  xv.  24.  Luke  i.  27. — 
«  A  man  whose  name  was  Joseph,  of  the  house  of  David," 
that  is,  doubtless,  a  descendant  of  David.  Same  chapter, 
verse  33.      «  And  he  shall  reign  over  tke  1wii$e  of  Jacob 


d7 

ibrpver.  Ver.  69.  And  hath  raisoil  a  horn  of  salvation  to 
us,  ill  tlie  house  of  David.'*  Sec  also  Luke  ii.  4.  x.  5.  xi. 
17.  Ill  otie  of  the  passaj^es  last  referred  to,  x.  5,  a  dis- 
tinrtion  is  made  between  (o/xiav)  the  residence  of  the  fami- 
ly and  (^oixog)  the  Ikjusc  or  family,  **  And  into  whatsoe- 
ver house  >e  enter,  first  say,  IVare  be  to  this  liouse.^*  Acts 
ii.  36,  "  Therefoi-e  let  the  whole  house  of  Israel  assured- 
ly know,"  kc.  Acts  x.  2,  «  A  devout  man,  that  feared 
God  with  all  his  housci**  &.c.  Here  Cornelius  is  distin- 
guished from  his  (dixog)  family.  Acts  xi.  14.  **  Who  shall 
speak  words  unto  thee,  by  which  thou  shalt  be  saved,  and 
all  thy  house.'*  See  also  xvi.  31,  xviii.  8,  1.  Cor.  i.  16. — 
**  I  baptised  also  the  house  (oixov)  f>f  Stephanas."  Refer- 
pcnces  on  this  subipct  might  be  extended  much  farther;  but 
these  are  all  siifHcient. 

This  use  of  tlic  term  house  in  the  sense  of  family,  as  be- 
fore remarked,  is  metaphorical,'  and  is  derived  from  the 
term  iiouse  in  the  sense  of  building;  that  is  a  fixed,  perma- 
nent and  lasting  residence: 

[Extracts  from  a  pamphlet,  entitleiU  Facts  and  Evidences  on 
the  subject  of  Baptism^  <^'c.  In  Three  Letters,  ^'c.  By  the 
Editor  of  CatmeVs  Dictionary y  «§"c.] 

"Now,  as  we  are  able  at  all  times  to  recur  to  the  proper 
use  of  this  term,  we  are  equally  able  to  correct  any  mis- 
take that  may  occur  in  the  metaphorical  use  of  it:  and  since 
we  find  the  term  used  metaphorically  in  several  languages, 
we  may  be  sure,  that  there  is  such  a  correspondence  and 
similarity  between  the  original  objict.  and  thesignifi'"ativC 
application  of  the  term,  that  with  a  little  prudence  and  pa- 
tience our  enquiries  into  its  real  meaning,  cannot  fail  of 
satisfactory  success.  Give  rae  leave,  therefore,  to  set  be- 
fore you  the  plan  of  a  house,  as  such  buildings  are  common- 
ly constructed  in  Greece;  and  as  we  have  every  reason  to 
believe,  they  were  commonly  constructed,  in  ancient  ages> 
F 


38 


Certainly,  I  do  not  mean  to  infer,  tliat  every  bouse  corre- 
sponds to  this  plan:  but  I  submit  it,  as  enabling  you  to  form' 
a  general,  an  ordinary,  or  leading  conception,  of  such  an 
establishment,  sufficient  for  every  useful  purpose  when  you 
wislhto  bring  a  proposed  idea  to  the  test  of  matter  of  fact. 


GARDEN  or  GROUJSDS. 


HOUSE. 


FAMILY. 


ENTRANCE,  or  GATE. 


«  The  first  remark  on  this  figure  is,  the  separation  of  the 
out-houses  from  the  principal  dwelling.  It  is  evident  that, 
correctly  speaking,  the  house  cannot  be  said  to  include  the 
grounds  and  out-houses:  the  home  might  be  built  up,  or  pul- 
led down,  enlarged,  or  diminished,  without  affecting  the 
out- houses,  in  the  least.  But,  the  out-houses  may  be  said, 
without  any  force  on  language,  to  include  the  house: — aiuS" 


39 


certaieily,  the  whole  may  be  expressed  by  one  comprchcii. 
sivo  term,  establishment — premises — nsideiice — place — 
buildings,  ^:c.  >Vc  have  oidy  to  suppose  that  the  house  is 
built  of  Btoiies;  or  permanent  materials  in  combination; 
(not  so  the  out-h«>uses)  to  complete  the  conception,  suffici- 
ently lor  our  purpose. 

«<  Such  is  the  proper  and  real  application  of  the  term  houses 
our  ^)resent  business  is  to  trace  the  conformity  of  the  ineta- 
phoncal  application  of  the  term,  to  this  reality.  1  suppose, 
there  cannot  be  equal  authority  on  this  subject,  much  less 
can  there  be  superior,  to  that  of  Aristotle,  the  famous  pre- 
ceptor of  Alexander  the  Great,  and  quite  as  good  a  critic 

in    Greek  as no  matter,   who.     In  writing  on  the 

polity  of  cities,  Aristotle  thus  defines  a  [l<Hise.  «<  A  House 
is  a  Society  [or  Companionship]  connected  together  accA)r- 
ding  to  the  course  of  nature,  for  long  continuance.  Such 
(a  Society)  is  called  by  Charondas,  **  those  wlio  eat  from 
tlie  same  cupboard"  or^)antry;but(it  is  called)  by  Epimen- 
ides,  the  Cretan,  **  those  who  sit  around  the  same  fire-side:** 
— [Or,  as  Du  Val,  the  Editor  of  Aristotle,  rather  supposes, 
correcting  by  conjecture,  "  those  who  sit  around  the  same 
tabic.*']     Such  a  Society,  says   Aristotle,   is  an  oikos,  or 

HOUSE. 

«  But,  the  old  Grecian  distinguishes  between  oikos 
House,  and  oikia,  //ouse  hold,  exactly  as  1  have  shewn  in 
my  former  letter,  that  Scripture  distinguishes.  Speaking 
of  a  city,  he  says,  "  In  order  to  obtain  a  clear  idea  of  the 
parts  of  which  a  city  is  composed,  it  is  necessary  that  we 
should  previously  explain  what  an  oikia  is.  For  every 
city  is  composed  of  connected  oikias:  and  further,  an 
OIKIA  (is  composed)  of  several  parts;  and  these  placed  toge- 
ther in  their  nations,  constitute  the  oikia.  But,  a  com- 
plete Oikia  comprises  the  servants  [slaves]  and  those 
who  arc  free."  By  "/rtr"  Arist(»tle  means,  as  appears 
from  the  tenor  of  his  whole  discourse,  extending  through 
several  chapters,  the  Master  aud  his  family:  one  who  is 


40 


capable  of  citizenship;  one  «  amonj^  tijosft  are  free  by  u^- 
turei — whereas,  to  snch  the  slaves  belong.'*  He  after- 
wards expatiates  on  this  definition:  he  speaks  of  the  wife  as 
bein,^  "free;"  not,  as  among  barbarians,  a  slave;  of  the 
chihli*en,  as  being  "  free,**  &r.  and  he,  says,  There  is  but  a 
slight  differanre  between  the  skill  required  to  govern  a 
great  oikia — House-uoi,n.  and  that  i^iquired  to  govern  a 
small  city.'*  On  the  whole,  nothing  can  be  clearer,  than 
that  the  term  otfcos — House — EXcxrDES  the  oikia — out-hou- 
seSi  or  floMse-HOLD  but,  the  term  oikia  includes  the  House: 
exactly  as  it  might  be  inferred  from  consideration  of  our 
plan;  where  the  proper  sense  of  the  terms,  with  this  natu> 
ral  distinction  and  distiibution  of  them,  is  reduced  to  mat- 
ter of  fact,  and  appears  to  the  conviction  of  the  eye. 

«<  Now,  give  me  leave  here,  to  beg  your  consideration. 
Sir,  as  to  what  Aristotle  himself,  had  he  met  with  the  term 
house  in  reading  the  N.  T.  Mould  have  understood  by  it— n 
or  rather — what  would  any  "  plain  unlettered  (Greek')  man 
having  only  the  Greek  N.  T.  in  his  hand,"  have  understood^ 
when  reading  in  his  native  language, — «<  We  baptized  Ly- 
dia,  with  her  society  connected  together,  according  to  the  course 
of  nature,  for  long  continuance:'^  "  >Vc  baptized  the  Jailor, 
with  ALL  those  who  eat  from  the  same  cupboard  as  himself^^ 
"  I  baptized  those  who  sit  around  pie  saniefire  side  with  my  va- 
lued friend  Stephanas-.-'UVf  if  yon  prefer  the  corrected  reading 
— <*  I  baptize  those  who  sit  around  the  same  table  with  my 
honoured  friend^  I  found  my  opinion  on  these  and  similar 
passages,  when  I  say,  a  Greek  reader  must  have  understood 
this  term — Iwuse — in  a  very  extensive  ^jense:  including  not 
only  ALL  the  children  in  every  stage  of  life,  but — something 
more. 

«  But,  the  elegance  of  the  last  definition  (tho"gl>  conjee- 
lural)  ♦<  those  who  sit  around  the  same  table,'*  reminds  mo 
of  the  exquisite  comparison  of  the  Psalmist — "  Thy  wfe 
shall  be  like  a  fruitful  vine,  by  the  side  of  thy  house;  thy 
children  like  olive  plunts  round  about  thy  table." 

<*  And,  this  again  reminds  me,  that,  though  writing  in 


41 


Orcck,  ihe  ApoRtlcs  wcit  HcbiTws  by  dfMccnt;  that  they 
were  piTfortly  familiar  with  the  Hebrew  Si  i-iptures,  and 
with  the  Uobrrw  langua.^e,  as  spoken  by  their  nation,  and 
that,  beyond  a  doubt,  they  used  the  term  iious^  in  the  same 
sense  as  it  was  used  by  tlie  Old  Testament  writers,  '['his 
will  not  be  denied:  and  if  it  is  not  denied,  we  have  only  to 
consult  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  and  rest  our  enquiry  oh 
their  answer,  as  the  termination  of  our  labours. 

<•  We  have  seen  three  Grecian  Philosophers  propose 
throe  different  ideas  (thouj^h  all  co-incident)  on  the  meta- 
phorical  signification  of  the  terra  House;  we  are  not,  then, 
to  wonder,  if  we  find  amoni*  the  Hebrews  a  fourtli  deriva- 
tion, entirely  distinct  from  either  of  the  former,  but  equally 
ingenious,  and  much  more  plausible. 
«  According  to  the  Hebrews,  tlie  metaphorical  derivation 
of  the  term  Uonse,f  was,  from  the  circumstance  of  a  dwell- 
ing-house being  built — bullt-lp — of  stones,  fur  instance. 
A  vietapliorical  House,  therefore, — a  family — was  a  build- 
ing of  liring  stones.  Ask  yourself,  tiien.  Sir,  which  are 
the  proper  living  stones  to  build  up  a  family  or  house? — are 
they  the  seniors  or  juniors? — is  the  infantt  born  to-day,  or 

the  man  of  a  hundi-ed  hears  old   who  dies  to  morrow? 

And  here  I  will  not  compound  with  you.  Sir;  I  will  not 
allow  you  to  say,  *'  the  term  limise^  as  used  in  the  O.  T. 
implies  tiic  Elders  of  a  family,  strictly  and  properly;  but 

the  infants  accidentally  and  improperly.'* 

"  No,  Sir,  1  willingly  hazard  the  utmost  severity  of  ct-n- 
sure,  when  I  affirm  on  the  contrary,  that  the  directs  strait 
forwards  exjilicitf  and  unquestionable,  leference  of  tlie  term 
ffousc  is  to  the  Infants,  primarily  and  properly;  and  to  the 
seniors  or  even  to  the  Parents,  if  at  all,  accidentally,  tm- 
properly,  and  occasionally  only.  The  proof  of  this  may 
safely  rest  on  the  following  passages: — and  first,  of  the  me- 
taphor Building. 

"  1  Sam.  vii.  27.    Thou,  O  Lord  God  of  Israel,  hast  i-e- 
vealcd  to  thy  servant,  saying,  I  will  build  thee  a 


42 


uoisE,  i.  o.  will  establish  thy  family.  Coinp.  1 
CuRON.  xvii.  25. 

»<  2  Sam.  vii.  11.  Also  the  Lord  telleth  thee  that  he  will 
MAKE  ihee  a  house. 

« £9.     Now  let  it  please  tliee  to  bless  tlie  hoiise 

of  thy  servant — and  with  thy  blessing  let  the  Iimise 
of  thy  servant  be  blessed  ftirever."  i.  e.  his/a7n- 
ily.  Compare  the  same  promise  to  Solomon;  1 
Kin^s  xi.  38. 

"  ExoD.  i.  21.  «<  And  it  came  to  pass,  because  the  mid- 
wives  fenrcd  God,  that  he  made  them  houses," 

i.  c.  he  j2^avcth<*m  niimerous/ajmVi^s. 
Gen.  XXX.  1,2.  «  Before  reading  the  following,  con- 
sult the  history  of  Jacob  and  Rachel;  "  Give  me  children, 
or  else  I  die,"  says  the  disappoi^jtcd  wife: — her  husband 
replies,  *<  am  I  in  God's  stead,  who  hath  with  held  from 
tliee  the  fruit  of  the  7Vomh?'* 
*'  Psalm  cxxvii.     Except  the  Lord  build  the  house,  they 

labour  in  vain  that  build  it. — 


*<  Lo  cniLDRE^,  are  a  heritage  of  the  Lord, 
and  the  fruit  of  the  tvomh  is  his  reward." 

«  The  Hebrew,  very  remarkable  here,  fixes  the  sense  to 
issue:  *'  those  who  labour  to  build  the  house,  in  it." 

•'  That  this  etymological  derivation  of  the  term  house — 
as  importing  a  metaphorical  huildingf  continued,  and  was 
ADOPTED  6^  the  JpostleSf  may  be  shown  from  various  pas- 
sages of  N.T. 

Eph.  ii.  19,  21.  "Now,  therefore,  ye  are  no  more  stran- 
gers and  foreigners,  but  fellow-citizens  with  the  saints  and 
members  of  the  house-hold  establishment  of  God;  and  arc 
BUILT  on  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets, 
Jesus  Christ  himself  being  thechief  corner  stone;  in  whom 
nil  the  BUILDING  fitly  framed  together,  groweth  into  a 
holy  temple  in  t!»e  Lord:  in  whom  ye  also  are  builded 
together  for  an  habitation  of  God  through  the  Spirit. 


4a 

1  l*ct.  ii.  4,  5.     "  Coming  to   the  I.ord«    as  to   a  living 

[life-giving]  stoiio, y a  aUo,  an  livins  stones  are  uuilt 

cp  a  spiritual  house    [family,  as  that  «f  Aaron,]  a  holy 
priesthood,  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices,"  tVc. 

Tit.  i.   U.      "They   subvert. — overturn, — turn    topsy- 
turvy  AvuoLE    HOUSES," — liiniilies:  the  very  reverse  of 

building  up:  vn-bHilding. 

«  These  passages  are  decisive. 

"  In  proof  that  house  imports  children— distinct  from 
their  parents. 

<»  Deut.  XXXV.  9.  Tiien  shall  liis  brothri-'s  wife  ....  spit 
in  his  face  and  say,  so  shall  it  be  done  unto  that 
man  who  will  not  build  up  his  brother's 
house,"  by  obtaining  children — iufants—U-oik 
his  widow. 
♦*  Gev.  xvi.  2.  And  Sarai  said  unto  Abraham,  the  Lord 
hath  restrained  me  from  child-bearing:  I  pray 
thee  go  in  unto  my  maid;  it  may  be  that  /  may 
obtain  (infant J  children  by  her;'—**  be  builded 
by  her."     Margin  and  Hebrew. 

L  XXX.  3.     Rachel  said  to  Jacob,   behold  my  maid 

Bilhah— slic  shall  bear  upon  my  knees,  that  /may 
also  have  f  infant  J  children  by  her," — be  build- 
ed by  her."     Margin  and  Hebrew. 
•<  Gen.  vii.     And  the  Lord  said  to  Noah,  come  thou  and 
all  thy  house  into  the  ark. 
<♦<  The  parent  is  distinguished  from  his  family. 
^  1  Rings  xvii.  8,  16.    The  widow  woman  of  Zarepta  did 
according  to  the  saying  of  Elijah;— and  1,  she, 
2,  he,  and  3,  her  house,  did  eat  many  days." — 
Her  son  must  be  her  house,  distinct  from  Itis  mo- 
ther; as  there  were  but  three  persons,  concerned 
in  the  history. 
«  Gen.   xlvi.  26,  31.     Jacob    and  all  his  seed  came  into 
Egypt,  his  sons,  his  sons  sons,  his  daughters  and 
his  sons   daughters— all  his  seed.     JiU  the  squU 


44 


'ivhich  came  out  of  his  loins — all  the  souls  of  the 
HOUSE  of  Jacob  were  three  score  and  ten."— — 
The  phrase  those  which  came  oiit  of  Hie  loim  of 
Jacob,  must  exclude  Jacob  himself. 
«"'  Numb,  xviii.  11.     The  heave  olTerin.^s  have  1  given  to 
thee  and  thy  sons,  and  to  thy  daughters  with  thee, 
every  one  that  is  clean  in  thy  house.     The  pa- 
rent is,   evidently,   not  comprised   in  the  term 
house. 
«  Dbut.  xxvi.  11.     Thon  shalt  rejoice  in  every  good  thing 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  given  thee,  and  un- 
to thine  house."      The  distinction  is  preserved 
here  also. 
^  2  Sam.  xiii.  11.     I  will  raise  up  evil  against  thee,  (Da~ 
Tid)  out  of  thine  own  /wwse;" — *'  from  among  thy 
children.     See  story  of  Absalom,  &c. 
«*  That  this   distinction  between   parents  and  children, 
ooNTiNUED,  and  was  adopted  by  the  Apostles,  is  manifest, 
from  the    passages  already    adduced: — Lydia,    and    her 
house: — ^the  Bishop,   and  his  house: — the  Deacon,  and   his 
house: — the  family  of  Stephanas,  separate  from  himself: — 
the  famikj  of  Crispus,  separate  from  himself: — the  family 
of  Onesiphorus,  separate,  &c. 

«  In  proof,  that  house  means  infaivts,  explicitly. 
«  Num.  xvi.  27*  22.     Dathan  and   Abiram  came  out  and 
stood  in  the  door  of  their  tents,  and  their  wives, 
and  their  sons,  and  their  little  children. — 
And  the  earth  opened  her  niouth  and  swallowed 
them  up,   and  their  houses." — Their  little  chil- 
dren then,  were  \\w\r  houses 
<•*  Job  XX.  28.     The  increase  of  his  house  shall  roll  awayj 
shall  flow  away  as  a  torrent  fl->\vs,  in  the  day  of 
his  wrath."  Tliat  the  term  «<  increase  of  a  house," 
means  a  family.   See  1  Sam.  ii.  3. 
*•  Psalm  Ixviii.  6.      God   setteth   the  solitary  fmanj    in 
families:^'   in  a  house,  i.  e.  infants.     Mar.  and 
Heb. 


45 

«'  Psalm  cxiii.  2.  God  makcth  tlio  baiTon  ^vornan  to  sit 
in  lu*i-  HOUSE— /a7uHy;  thcjojful  mother  of  cAi^ 
dretif*'  INFANTS. 

**  Isaiah  xiii.  6.  Their  children  shall  be  dashed  to  pieces 
before  their  e>es»  their  houses  shall  be  spoiled, 
and  their  wives  ravislied.  Tlic  Medes  shall  not  re- 
gard silver,  nor  delight  in  gold.— Their  bows 
siiall  dash  the  young  men  to  pieces:  They  shall 
have  n(»  pity  on  the  Jruit  of  the  womb:  tht-ir  eye 
shall  not  spare  children.** 
<<  It  was  not  the  dwelling  liouses  which  the  Medes  were 

to  spoil,  for  they  regarded  not  silver  nor  gold;  which  is  the 

natural  spoil  of  dwelling  houses;  but  houses  in  the  sense  of 

Jumilies— the  Jruit  of  the  7Vomh,  i.  c.  infants. 

"  House  means  Infants,  before  they  are  conceived— 

Consequently,  when  they  »re  not  present. 

•«  Gen.  xviii.  19.  "I  know  Al'raham,  that  he  will  com- 
mand his  children  [plural]  even  his  house,  after 
him."  Here  Isaac  is  spnken  of  as  house  to  Abra- 
ham, in  the  close  of  the  <lay  on  which  he  was  pmm- 
ised  by  the  three  Angels;  consequently  before  his 
conception. 

A  2  Sam.  vii.  11-16.     "  The  Lord  telleth  thee  that  he  will 

MAKE    thee  a  house and  set  up  thy 

SEED  after  thee,  which  shall  proceed  out  of  thy 
ftoTfeis"— Consequently,  this  infant,  David's  suc- 
cessor, was  not  yet  begotten. 

«•  Ruth  iv.  12.  "  And  all  the  people  that  were  in  the 
gate,  and  the  ciders  said— The  Lord  make  the 
woman  that  is  come  into  thy  (dwelling)  house, 
like  Rachel  and  like  Leah,  which  two  did  build 
UP  the  house  of  Israel:— And  let  tht  house 
(family)  be  like  the  house  of  Pharez,  whom  Ta- 
mar  bare  unto  Judah,  of  the  seed  which  thb 
Lord  shall  oive  thee  of  this  young  wo- 
man. 
G 


4^ 

<*  If  is  not  pos?iible  by  any  wos'ds,  or  fbrm  of  Words', 
vhatcver,  to  express  Infants  more  decidedly,  than  by 
these  applications  of  the  term  house:  and,  in  fact,  if  there 
were  no  other  text  in  the  Old  Testament,  this  last,  al()ne> 
is  sufficient  to  establish  the  proposition  that  the  term  house 
in  Old  Tcstaiuent  language  must  mean  an  infant.  The 
idea  recurs  repeatedly  in  the  passage.  1.  The  building  up 
the  house  of  Israel  is  iji/aw^-child-bearing,  undoubtedly^ 
2.  Thy  HOUSE — that  is,  the*'  s.  ed  which  the  Lord  shall 
GIVE  THEE  of  this  young  woman,"  must  mean  an  infant', 
and  this  is  the  national  and  acknowledged  language,  used 
by  «  all  the  people  that  were  in  the  gate;"  and  not  by  the 
vulgar  only,  but  by  those  well  instructed  also;  by  the  elders; 
and  this  took  place  before  Boaz  was  married:  for  it  fol- 
It)ws — So  Boaz  took  Ruth  to  wife."  The  rest  of  the  story 
we  know. 

*'  Thus  we  see  that  an  infant  is  expressed  in  Old  Testa- 
ment language,  by  the  term  house,  both  by  father's  side  and 
mother's  side,  before  it  is  begotten  or  conceived: — that  the 
same  usage  of  the  word  was  continued  and  adopted  by 
the  Jpostles,  is  clear  fi-om  the  instance  of  the  young  women,^ 
in  Timothy,  concerning  whom  the  Apostle  says,  as  of  an 
event  yet  future,  he  would  have  them  «  marry — bear  chil- 
dron—despotize  their  house."  nv  family;  in  exact  conform- 
ity with  the  wishes  of  the  Elders  and  the  people,  in  behalf 
of  Boaz  and  Rutti. 

»<  We  need  extend  our  enquiries  no  further: — Ictus  re-, 
ducc  the  result  to  conclusive  evidence. 

**  By  what  was  Sarai  arid  Rachel  huilded  up?  By  In- 
fants. 

«»  AVhat  does  the  term  Souses  imply?  Little  chil- 
dren. 

*«  In  what  house  does  God  set  the  solitary  man? — In  an 
i?NF  AN  T  family. 

««  In  what  imise  docs  God  set  the  barren  woman?  In  an 
wajSANT  family. 


47 

^*  What  in  the  increase  of  a  Imise?    Infants. 

•*  NVhat  is  a  liojise  in  the  beiise  ul' fruit  of  the  womb?     IK- 

KANTS. 

♦•  \N  hat  was  to  he  commanded,  as  his  Ilauiie,  hy  Ahra* 
ham?     His  expected  infant,  iHaac. 

"What  limse  was  the  seed  which  shall  proceed  out  of 
thine  own  bowels?     An  Infant. 

♦  »  >\  hat  house  was  the  seed  which  the  Lord  suall  give 
thee  of  this  y(»ung  woman?     An  Infant. 

»'  In  these  ten  instances,  (and  twenty  might  he  added) 
the  term  house  mlst  signify  infants: — it  can  sigiiify 
notliing  else:  and,  moreover,  it  signifies  infants,  tlioiigli 
ml  actuallij  present. 

«•  With  tliese  ten  instances  of  the  signification  of  the 
term  house  in  Old  I'estament  hinguage,  l)efore  your  eyes, 
and  with  every  demonstration  of  tin-  continued  sense  and 
ADOPTION  of  the  term  hy  the  Apostles,  to  the  same  [import, 
and  iiitenti(»n,  and  without  variation,  in  the  jN.  T.  give  mc 
lease  to  ask  yoa,  Sir, 

"  What  did  the   Apostles   baptize,   wuen  tuey 

SAY    they    BAPTIZED  HOUSES? 

«'  The  question  a(hnits  hutof  one  answer:  in  giving  that, 
let  Conscience  and  Common  sense  do  their  duty. 

"  To  conclude;'* — what  would  a  pious  Uehrew  Christian 
reading  the  New  Testament  have  understood  hy  the  term 
House,  in  the  Apostles'  days,  when  he  found  it  in  various 
parts  of  their  (sacred)  writings?  Coiild  he, ;)oss?6/?/,  have 
separated  tlie  idea  of  Infants  from  it? — And,  if  he  had 
been  told  that  it  was  to  be  taken  as  excluding  Infants,  would 
he  not  have  complained  of  the  deception  practised  on  him? 
Would  he  not  have  said,  •♦  If  the  N.  T.  writers  use  this 
word  in  a  sense  never  before  used  in  our  nation,  a  sense  en- 
tirely new,  and  contradictory  to  common  and  popular  ac- 
ceptation, why  did  they  not  tell  us  so?  Ilow  are  we  to  un- 
derstand them,  if  not  hy  the  language  they  usr?— And,  how 
arc  wo  to  understand  their  language,  if  not  in  its  popular^ 


48 


customary,  and  Jixed  arccptation; — the  same  as  that  in 
which  it  has  uiiintci'uptedly  been  employed,  from  the  days 
of  our  father  Abraham,  t(»  this  day; — and,  in  fact,  in  which 
it  is  employed,  at  this  very  day?''* 

Now,  what  term  more  decisive  and  unequivocal  could 
have  been  adopted  by  the  sacred  writers,  for  the  purpose 
of  assuriuj^  us  that  the  Apostles  baptised  children:  TJie 
Greek  words  Flat?,  /3p£(?)og,  ^^e^vTJ^liw,  TexvoVy  and  their 
corresponding  words,  in  Latin,  itnlian,  French,  and  Eng- 
lish, such  as  puer,  pueruluSf  infmite,  enfant^  infantf  child, 
&c.  are  ambiguous.  If  then,  the  historian  had  said,  «*  The 
apostles  baptised  men,  women  and  children;"  or  <*  When 
X.ydia  and  her  children  were  baptised'* — this  might  per- 
jhaps  have  satisfied  some  who  now  doubt  on  the  subject  of 
baptising  children.  But  it  would  not  have  satisfied  pre- 
judice. It  would  be  easy  in  this  case,  to  quote  such  pas- 
sages as  these,  «  The  childe  of  the  age  of  fourteen  yere.** 
«  The  last  will  and  testament  of  tiie  little  infant  Civfantu- 
his  J  Adald;  aged  eighteen — Gen.  xxxvii.  30."  *»  Thec/w7d 
(Joseph)  is  not;  and  I,  whither  shall  I  go?"  [Note.  Jo- 
seph at  this  time  was  sixteen  years  old,]  Gen.  xliv.  20.— 
f  And  we  said  unto  my  Lord,  We  have  a  father,  an  old 
man,  and  a  child  of  his  old  age,  a  little  onCf  &. — [TIjIs  is  spo- 
ken of  Benjamin,  sou  of  Jacob,  then  upwards  of  thirty 
years  old,]  and  hundreds  of  others  from  various  langua- 
ges, of  the  same  import.  From  all  which,  the  conclusion 
might  be  drawn,  that  the  children  mentioned  as  baptised  by 
the  apostles,  were  in  all  probability  such  children  as  Jo- 
seph and  Benjamin  in  the  texts  quoted  above.  Hence  the 
subject  would  have  been  as  unsettled  as  can  be  imagined. — 
In  this  ambiguity  of  language,  the  sacred  histoi-ian  has 
chosen  a  word  more  determinate  and  settled  in  its  signifi- 
cation, than  the  word  children.  He  has  told  i:s  that  the 
apostles  baptised  (6ix«$)  Families. 

But  the  positive  and  decisive  fact,  that  the  apostles  bap- 
tised young  children,  may  be  set  in  a  still  clearer  light,  by 


4» 


a  farther  examination  of  the  sacred  record.  The  evidenct 
already  adduced,  apiwars  to  me  amply  suflicient;  yet  in  a 
subject  that  has  been  so  much  controverted,  it  is  well  to 
brinj^  forward  abundant  testimony. 

For  this  purpose,  wc  turn  from  the  history  of  Lydia*s 
baptism,  to  that  of  the  Jailor,  recorded  also  in  the  l6th 
chapter  of  the  Acts.  Ver.  27-34.  »»  And  the  keeper  of 
the  prison  awakinjj;  out  of  his  sle<p,  and  seeing  the  prison 
doors  open,  he  drew  out  his  sword,  and  would  have  killed 
himself,  supposing  that  the  prisoners  had  been  fled.  But 
Paul  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  saying,  "  Do  thyself  no  harm; 
for  we  are  all  here*'*  Then  lie  called  for  a  light,  and 
sprang  in;  and  came  trembling,  and  fell  down  before  Paul 
and  Silas;  and  bronglit  them  out,  and  said,  "  Sirs,  what 
must  I  d<»  to  be  saved?"  And  they  said,  "  Believe  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved  and  thy/wMse" 
(6f'xo$.)  And  they  spake  unto  him  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
and  to  all  t'lat  were  in  his  house,  {oixlaO  And  he  took 
tlK'm  the  same  hour  of  the  night,  and  washed  their  stri|)es; 
and  was  baptised  he  and  all  his,  straightway.  And  wiien 
he  had  brought  them  into  his  house,  (oixov)  ''^  set  meat  be- 
fore them;  and,  having  believed  in  God,  he  rejoiced  with 
all  his  house;"  (Ttavoixi  ^vith  all  his  family.)  Uei-e  arc 
incidental  circumstances,  which  strongly  sh«)w  that  tho 
Jailor  was  in  the  pHme  of  life. — Such  as  his  impetuosity 
and  the  vehemence  of  his  passions:  as  soon  as  he  saw  the 
prison  doors  open,  he  drew  his  sword,  and  was  about  to 
kill  himself. — This  does  not  look  like  an  aged  father  of  a 
family  surrounded  by  a  number  of  adult  riiildren.  Again; 
as  soon  as  Paul  called  to  him,  he  spkano  into  the  prison. 
The  action  here  is  that  of  a  man  in  the  vigour  of  his  days. 
But  this  man,  thus  vigorous,  had  a  numerous  family:  this 
appears  from  the  text;  *'  he  and  all  /ns" — he  rej(»iced  with 
ALL  his  house.  Now,  surely,  every  circumstance  here 
shows  that  the  Jailor  was  a  m.in  in  the  vigour  of  liis  days. 
He  believed,  and  he,  with  all  his  (numerous  family)  were 


5D 


baptised.    Now,  considering  the  ambiguity  of  the  word», 
ehildf  infant,  puer,  6pE(pogj  &^c.,  we  ap])eal  to  any  impat'tial 
reader,  to  say  whether  the  record  of  the  baptism  of  thf  Jail- 
or and  his  family,  taken  with  all  the  attendant  circumstan- 
ces, does   not  afford   more  decisive  evid>Mice   in  favour  of 
what  is   commonly  called  infant  baptism,   than  if  it  had 
been  said   in  express  terms,  that  the  Jailor  and  his   little 
ones  were  baptised.     For,  in  this  case,  as  we  have  before 
seen,  it  might  be  said,  Joseph  was  called  a  child  at  the  age 
of  sixteen;  and  Benjamin,  a  little  one  when   more  than 
tliirty  years  old — and   who  can  tell  but  tliat  the  Jailor's 
little  ones  were  such  as  these.     But  when  we  see  the  Jail- 
or driving  headlong  with  youthful  ardour,  and  springing 
with  an  elasticity  and  vigour,  that  we  know  do  not  belong  to 
old  age,  and  at  the  same  time  have  unequivocal  evidence 
in   the  use  of  the  words,  all  his,  that  he  had  a  numerous 
family,  the  matter  is  put  out  of  all  doubt.     The  life  of  man, 
at  that  time,   and  long  before,   had  been   reduced   to  three 
score  years  and  ten;  as  is  tlie  case  now.      But  we  know 
■what  the  course  of  nature  flow  is.     We  know  that  a  man 
in  the   vigour  of  life  now,   with  a  numerous  family  has 
young  children.     And  we  are  assured  that  the  Jailor  had 
young  cljildren  too,  not  by  doubtful  phrases,   but  by  the 
Tiniformity  of  the  course  of  nature. 

Should  any  doubt  be  entertained  respecting  the  word 
(TtavoLxi)  translated,  rviih  all  his  house,  ver.  34,  it  may  be 
observe<l  for  the  sake  of  those  who  read  Greek,  that  He- 
sychius  rendei-s  it  by  the  words  avv  o/lo)  la  oixdj  ^ith  his 
whole  Jamil  tj;  and  that  it  occurs  in  the  Septuagint,  Exod. 
i.  1.  in  the  same  signification,  tvith  his  whole  family.  In 
the  English  translation,  this  verse  reads  thus;  ««  Now 
these  arc  the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel  that  came  into 
Egypt;  every  man  and  his  household  [family]  came  with 
Jacob."  Here  the  man  is  distinguised  from  his  family; 
and  here  also,  the  word  under  consideration  means  children. 


5i 


tlcMCendaiits;  for  tlie  persons  designated,  are  express- 
ly said  to  come  out  of  the  loins  of  Jacob.  Wlien,  there- 
fore tlie  Jailor  is  said  to  rejoice  Ttavoixi,  ^ve  arc  sure  that 
it  was  with  his  family,  his  children,  that  he  rejoiced,  or, 
according  to  the  definition  before  given,  with  those  who 
«tc  at  the  same  table  witli  him. 

•»  St.  L*ikc  was  a  good  Greek  writer;  and  he  relates  the 
history  of  the  Jailor  with  his  customary  precision.  He 
says,  St.  Paul  advised  him,  ♦<  Brlieve  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,  witli  thy  family.  And 
they  spoke  unio  him  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to  all  that 
were  in  his  house-hold  (qhclav)  i^il  in  tiic  jail,'*  &c.  lie 
brought  all  in  his  power  under  the  word;  as  Cornelius  had 
done;  but  it  is  not  said  that  all  who  were  in  his  /louse-hold^ 
attendants,  prisoners,  &c.  were  baptised.  No:  but  he  and 
Ms  family  were  biiptisrd:  he  rejoiced  with  his  family,  hav* 
ing  believed  (7t£7ti(J%VK0x;)  in  God.  All  heard  the  word; 
but  only  his  own  family  accompanied  the  Jailor  in  baptism. 
Certainly  this  Jailor  became  one  of  the  Philippian  bre- 
thren; and  certainly  he  would  not  loose  the  opportunity  of 
attending  the  consolatary  exhortation  at  Lydia's;  and  of 
bidding  his  spiritual  fathers  farc\vell.  The  baptism  of  this 
family  is  spoken  of  with  ease  and  coolness,  as  was  that  of 
Lydia;  as  the  ordinary  course  of  events:  the  children  Jic- 
companying  the  father,  as  is  natural."  Facts  and  Evidcti'- 
ccSf  &c.  pa.  33. 

Before  we  take  leave  of  the  facts  recorded  in  the  with 
chapter  of  Acts,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  notice  the  40th 
verse:  because  that  passage  has  been  used  in  an  atten)pt  to 
show,  that  the  family  of  Lydia  consisted  of  adults,  who 
were  baptised  on  a  profession  of  their  faith.  The  words 
arc,  «  And  they  went  out  of  the  prison,  and  entered  into 
the  house  of  Lydia:  and  when  they  had  seen  the  brethren, 
ihey  comforted  them;  and  departed."  The  assumption  is, 
tliat  the  brrihrm.  seen  by  the  ajwstles,   were  members  of 


6^ 


Lydia*9  family.    But  where  is  tlie  proof?    We  know  that 
the  apostles  were  led  out  of  prison  publicly,  by  the  princi- 
pal officers  of  the  place,  in  a  very  kind   and  civil  manner; 
and  were  entreated  to  leave  the  city.      Now,  what  proves 
that  they  did  not,  after  retiring  to  their  lodgings  at  Ly- 
dia's,  go  round  and  see  the  brethren  that  lived  in  Philippi? 
The  compressed  narrative  of  Luke  does  not   forbid  this 
supposition.     But  there  is  another,   much  more  probable 
than  this,  and  which  I  have  no  doubt  expresses  the  truth  of 
the  case.     We  certainly  know  that  the  apostle  Paul  found- 
ed a  church  at  Philippi.      He  first  visited  that  city  about 
the  year  of  our  Lord  55;  and  when  he  took  his  departure 
thence,  he  went  to  Thessalonica  (see  Acts  xvii.  1.)    About 
the  year  62  he  wrote  his  letter  to  the  Philippians.     In  tliaf 
letter  he  mentions  the  affectionate  attachment  of  the  bre- 
thren of  Philippi  to  him,  and  the  repeated  proofs  they  had 
given  of  their  love.     "  Notwithstanding  ye  have  well  done, 
that  ye  did   communicate  with  my  affliction.      Now,   yc 
Philippians,  know  also,   that  in  the  beginning  of  the  gos- 
pel, when  I  departed  from   Macedonia,  no  chtjrcu  com- 
municated with  me  as  concerning  giving  and  receiving, 
but  ye  only:  For  even  in  Thessalonia  ye  sent  once  and 
AGAIN  to  mtj  necessity.**  iv.  4-16.      Here  Is  positive  evi- 
dence that,  although  Luke  mentions  only  the  conversion  of 
Lydia  and  the  Jailor,  that  a  church  was  organized  at  Phi- 
lippi before  Paul    left  the  place:  and  one  woiild  suppose, 
a  flourishing    church  too. — For   when   the    apostle    was 
labouring  for  others,  these  affectionate   brlievers  sent  once 
and  again  their  contributions  for  his  support.     With  tl.is, 
let  us  bear  in  mind  that  Paul  and  his  companion  l(»dg<'d 
with  Lydia;  that  there  were  then  no  houses  for  christians 
to  worship  in;  and  that  they  were  accustomed,  therefore, 
to  meet  in  private  *dwellings;  .and  we  shall  see  at  once  who 


*  Romans  xvi.  5.     Likewise  greet  the  Church  that  is  in  their  house,  i 
e.  the  house  of  Aquilla  and  Pnscilla,  ver.  3.— See  also  1  Cor.  xvi.  19, 


5d 

were  the  brethren  that  Paul   saw  at  Lydia's  lioiiso 

Doubtless,  thoy  wi'ie  the  niembeis  of  the  church  oiganized 
there,  and  among  them  their  latest  convert,  the  Jaih»r,  who, 
rejoicing  in  i\w  saIvati(Mi  of  which  he  had  partaken,  would 
surely  accompany  his  prisoner  just  discharged,  to  the  house 
where  the  brethren  had  been  accustomed  to  meet.  It  waa 
not  tlie  family  of  Lydia,  her  children  alone,  tliat  the  apos- 
tle comforted  before  he  took  his  leave  of  this  affectionate 
people,  but  th£  hrelhren,  the  members  of  the  church  of  Phi- 
lippi. 

The  next  express  mention  of  the  baptism  of  a  family  is 
made  in  Actsxviii.  8.  <*  And  Crispus.  the  chief  ruler  of  the 
synag(»gue,  believed  on  the  Lord  with  all  his  house  {pixa* 
family),  and  many  of  the  Corintliians,  hearing,  believed, 
and  were  baptised."  That  Crispus  and  his  family  were 
baptised,  is  beyond  doubt.  But  it  may  be  said  that  they 
all  believed.  Admit  that  they  did.  We  know  that  the  or- 
dinary officers  of  tl«e  synagogue,  were  called  EWer.s  because 
they  were  advanced  in  age;  and  that  the  Chief  ruler  of  tlw 
synagogue  would  of  course  be  an  (dd  man.  While  thei-e- 
foi*e  Lydia  was  probably  a  young  and  active  woman,  and  the 
Jailor  was  a  man  in  the  prime  of  life,  their  young  families 
were  baptised,  and  no  mention  made  of  the  faith  of  any 
person  but  the  parent,  the  head  of  the  family.  But  here, 
where  we  have  moral  certainty,  although  the  historian  docs 
not  specify  it,  that  the  head  of  the  family  was  an  aged  man, 
we  arc  t(dd  that  he  believed  with  all  his  house,  atid  they 
were  baptised.  The  children  in  this  case  were  adidt,  and 
must  give  evidence  of  docility  before  they  could  be  admitted 


Co!,  iv.  15.  Salute  the  brethren  that  are  in  Laodicea,  and  Nymphas, 
and  the  church  which  is  in  his  house. 

Philemon  2.  Paul  presents  his  salutation,  "  To  the  beloved  Apphia, 
and  to  Archippus,  and  to  the  church  in  thy  house."  Let  these  passages  be 
compared  with  Acts  xvi.  4^),  the  verse  under  examination,  and  with  Philip, 
tv.  14.  15,16,  and  there  will  be  no  doubt  respecting  the  brethren  seen 
xt.  the  house  of  Lydia. 

H 


St 

into  the  School  of  l^irist.  This  is  precisely  wliat  oh 
pedobaptist  principles  wo  should  require;  and  on  hearing 
that  the  family  of  an  aged  man  was  baptised,  we  should  ex- 
pect to  hear  of  the  profession  of  their  faith.  This  case  i» 
something  of  the  nature  of  an  exception  to  a  general  rule — 
cxceptiojirmat  regxdam.  Lydia  believed^  and  was  baptised 
with  her  family — the  Jailor  believed,  and  was  baptised  with 
his  family — Old  Crispus  believed^  with  his  family,  and  they 
were  baptised.  The  putting  of  these  parts  of  scripture  to- 
gether brings  to  my  mind  with  irresistible  evidence,  the 
truth  as  before  stated  respecting  the  baptising  of  Lydia  and 
the  Jailor  with  their  chihlren. 

Yet  while  I  make  the  above  admission,  it  ought  not  to  be 
concealed  from  the  reader,  that  some  very  ingenious  men 
have  strongly  doubted  whether  the  expression  "  Crispus  be- 
lieved on  the  Lord  with  all  his  house"  is  to  be  construed  li- 
terally; they  seem  rather  inclined  to  maintain  that  it 
means  no  more,  than  that  on  the  faith  of  their  parents  they 
were  brought  Into  a  state  of  discipleship.  This  doubt  on 
one  hand,  and  opinion  on  the  other,  are  founded  on  what 
the  Apostle  Paul  says,  1  Cor.  i.  14.  «  I  thank  God  that 
1  baptised  none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gains.  It  will  be 
recollected  here,  that  there  were  divisions  in  the  Corin- 
thian Church.  One  was  of  Paul,  another  of  4polIosy 
kc.'y  and  there  were  strenuous  efforts  to  put  down  the 
apostolic  authority  uf  Paul.  The  apostle  wished  to  show 
that  he,  in  no  way  whatever,  had  any  hand  in  these  divi- 
sions. He  even  thanked  God  that  he  had  baptised  none 
but  Crispus  and  Gains.  None  of  whom?  Certainly  of  the 
merei)ers  of  the  Corinthian  Church  who  were  engaged  in 
those  party  disputes.  But  cmc  would  suppose  from  the 
narrative  of  Luke,  and  indeed  from  the  nature  of  the  case 
that  he  who  baptised  Crispus,  baptised  his  family  also. — 
Hence  it  has  been  inferred  that  the  Children  of  Crispu» 
nere   too  young  to   be  engaged   in  the   management  of 


55 


Dliurch  affairs  and  in  crrlesiastiral  disputes;  and  that  when 
Crispus  is  said  to  have  believed  with  his  whole  family — 
and  that  they  were  baptised,  it  means  no  more  than  that  he, 
on  hcromint^  a  disciple,  had  his  whole  family  made  disciples 
too.  This  conclusion  is  stienj;tlieiied  by  the  consideration 
that  Crispus  was  a  Jew;  else  how  should  he  be  chief  ruler 
of  the  synago.e;ue?  Now  it  was  a  maxim  among  the  Jews, 
as  stated  l)y  their  j^reat  Rabbi  Maimonides,  *'  If  an  Isra- 
elite find  a  heathen  infant,  and  ba])tise  him  in  the  name  of 
«  proselyte,  behold,  he  is  a  proselyte."  Now  if  the  spirit 
of  this  maxim  were  applied  by  the  historian  t  •  the  case  of 
Crispus,  he  mi.ght  very  well  have  used  the  manner  of  spea- 
kinj?  em])loyed  in  the  text.  There  is  really  somethiiij^  in- 
genious and  plausible  in  tliis  reasoning.  It  is  left  to  the 
consideration  of  the  reader. 

The  next  express  mention  of  the  hajitism  fjf  a  family  is 
made  by  the  apostle  Paul  1.  Cor.  i.  16.  "  And  1  ha]jtised  al- 
so the  household  of  Stephanas:  besides,  I  know  not  whether 
I  baptised  any  other."  The  j)liraseology  of  Paul  here  is 
very  remarkable.  He  had  affirmed  befere,  that  he  had  bap- 
tised none  of  the  Corinthian  members — except  Crispus  and 
Gains:  that  is  none  of  those  who  were  raising  party  dis- 
putes. After  this  general  declaration,  he  sees  fit  to  atlirm 
that  he  had  baptised  the  family  of  Stephanas;  but,  as  for  the 
rest  [for  so  ^ltxov  ought  to  he  rendered]  he  baptised  none. 
*»  Jisfor  the  rest** — to  what  does  this  refer?  "  I  do  not  know 
whether  I  baptised  any  other** — any  other  what?  Let  any 
one,  who  can  perceive  the  grammatical  contitniction  of 
words,  answer.  Surely  the  apostle  means  to  say,  as  for 
other  baptised  families,  1  do  not  know  that  1  baptised  any 
of  them.  This  is  the  phiin  natui'al  meaning  of  this  passage, 
and  it  shows  very  forcibly  that  the  baptising  ui'  families 
was  a  very  common  occurrence.  <)bsi*rve  the  uncertainty 
with  which  th«'  apostle  speaks.  lie  knew,  indeed,  that  he 
had  baptised  tho  family  of  Stephanas;  but  he  did  not  know 


66 

that  he  had  baptised  any  other.     Surely  if  the  baptising  of 
C  familij  bad  been  a  rart-  and  extraordinary  occurrence, 

the   apostle  could  not  have  expressed  himsolf  thus. 

But  on  the  supposition,  timt  during  his  long  abode 
at  Corinth,  multit  ules  of  families  had  been  baptised, 
we  can  easily  see  how  he  might  have  felt  uncertain,  whe- 
ther he  baptised  any  but  that  of  his  particular  friend  Ste- 
phanas. This  instance  then,  is  of  great  value  in  the  argu- 
ment; because  froin  the  manner  in  which  it  is  introduced,  we 
learn  that  it  was  quite  common  in  (he  Corintliian  church 
to  baptise  children,  that  is  families.  So  decisive  does  this 
appear  to  my  mind,  that  if  the  ISew  Testament  contained 
nothing  else  on  the  subject,  1  sliouldhave  no  doubt  that  the 
apostles  practised,  what  is*  improperly  called,  infant  bap- 
tism. Let  this  text  be  read  to  any  person  of  plain  common 
sense,  thus,  "  I  baptised  tlie  family  of  Stephanas;  and  of 
the  rest,  I  do  not  know  whether  1  baptised  any  other:'*  or, 
using  the  English  version,  «*  I  do  not  know  whether  I 
baptised  any  other  besides.'* — And  let  him  be  asked,  any 
other  what?  or  let  a  school  boy  parse  the  sentence,  and 
say  what,  according  to  grammatical  propriety  the  adjec- 
tives any  other  agree  with.  Or  propose  t!»is  Greek  sen- 
tance  to  a  young  collegian,  or  any  person  that  can  read  the 
language;  ElSoLTtliGa  Se  xou  tov  XJe^va  OIKON;  ^tTtop 
Qvx  oiha  «  Iwa  d?J?MV  sSanlvaa^  and  let  him  say  what 
substantive  aXTuov  agrees  with.  Certainly  with  oixov, 
family.  Hence,  I  can  have  no  doubt  but  that  the  baptism 
of  families  was  a  \try  common  occurrence  during  the  year 
and  six  months  of  Paul's  abode  at  Corinth.      And  I  can 


•  I  say  improperlyi!  because  tlie  phrase  hifant  baptism  put  in  opposition 
to  adult  baptism,  seems  to  imply  that  there  are  two  baptisms,  of  difTer- 
ent  character.  It  would  be  precisely  as  proper  to  speak  of  infant  ciruin- 
cbion,  as  opposed  to  adult  circumcision,  and  a»  a  different  rite.  But 
'Who  does  not  see  the  absurdity  of  this? 


57 


well  believe,  that  it  was  a  rommon  occurrence  at  evci-y 
place  where  a  <  lirisliaii  church  was  loimded,  although  not 
many  instances  are  mentioned  by  the  sacred  historian.— 
Luke  does  not  mention  in  Jicts  the  baptism  ot  the  family  of 
Stephanas,  and  we  should  never  have  known  any  thing  of 
that,  and  the  important  information  connected  with  it,  had 
there  not  been  a  schism  in  the  church  at  Corinth;  and  had  it 
not  been  for  the  eagerness  of  the  apostle  Paul  to  show  tliat 
he  was  no  parti zaii. 

But  we  are  told  that  the  instance  of  the  baptism  of  the 
family  of  Stephanas  affoids  no  suppoit  to  our  doctrine,  be- 
cause they  were  all  adults;  as  appears  from  1  Cor.  xvi.  15. 
*<  I  beseech  you  hrethnn,  (ye  know  t'.e  house  of  Stephanas, 
that  it  is  the  first  fruits  of  Acliaia,  and  that  they  have  ad- 

dieted  themsrlves  unto  the   ministry  of  the  saints.'') 

Hence  it  is  inferred,  that  the  house  of  Sthtphanas  t  onsist- 
ed  of  persons  of  matui'C  age,  and  that  they  were  baptised 
on  a  profession  of  their  faith.  Now  admitting  that  all  this 
is  just,  which  by  the  way  we  cannot  do,  it  l»y  no  means 
iuN alidates  our  inference  that  the  baptism  of  families  was 
common  in  the  practice  of  the  apostles.  But  let  us  ex:tm- 
ine  this  subject.  And  here  the  reader  of  the  original  will 
perceive  a  jjifterence  in  the  words  used  by  Paul,  w lien  he 
sjjeaks  of  the  baptism  of  the  family  i.  16,  and  of  the  hmise 
of  Stephanas  xvi.  15.  In  the  first  case;  he  uses  the  word 
OIKOS;  '""J  '«>  the  last,  tiic  word  ohdav.  Our  translation 
rendtrs  both  by  the  same  word,  liouse.  But  surely  the 
difference  made  in  the  original  ought  to  be  preserved  in  the 
version.  The  sense  in  which  Paul  used  this  last  word  may 
be  learned  from  Phil.  iv.  22,  ♦♦  All  the  saints  salute  you, 
chiefly  they  that  are  of  Caesar's  household  (oixiat;;)  ■•  e. 
Cjesar's  domestics:  And  how  he  used  the  term  olxog  may 
be  learned  from  1  Tim.  iii.  4.  A  bishop  must  Uo,  *'  one 
that  ruleth  well  his  own  iioi  si:,    havine:  his  children  in 


58 


subjection  with  all  gravity.  In  speaking  then  of  the  bap- 
tism of  the  house  {ovxb)  of  Stephanas,  Paul  means  his  chil- 
dren; in  speaking  of  the  kindness  of  the  house  of  Stepha- 
nas, and  their  attendance  on  the  brethren,  he  means  his 
domesticSi  ihosr  of  his  liotisehold.  But  it  ought  to  be  un- 
derstood that  (oma)  household  includes  perhaps  tlie  (0(^x05) 
house,  or  family.  Now  there  is  a  question,  to  what  ser- 
vice did  the  oixid  devote  themselves?  It  is  entirely  a  gra- 
tuitous assumption  that  they  were  ministers  of  the  gospel. 
The  word  AIAKONIA  means  any  kind  of  service,  for  in- 
stance, serving  at  the  table,  procuring  food,  affording  sup- 
port, rendering  offices  of  kindness,  distributing  alms,  per- 
forming the  service  of  a  religious  teacher,  &c.  Now,  out 
of  all  these  significations,  it  seems  to  me  strange  that  any 
shouldvfix  on  the  last,  and  assign  that  office  to  the  house- 
hold (domestics)  of  Stephanas.  I  confess,  however,  that 
this  passage,  as  it  stands  in  the  original,  presents  difficul- 
ties in  its  grammatical  structure,  which  I  do  not  know  well 
what  to  do  with,  1  speak  here,  not  as  a  theologian  or  po- 
lemic, but  simply  as  a  grammarian.  And,  adopt  what  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  I  may,  the  difficulty  presses  on  mc:  nor 
do  I  stand  alone  in  this  case.  The  harshness  and  «!ifficul- 
ty  of  the  original  has  embarrassed  every  commentator 
that  I  have  seen.  The  best  solution  of  the  sentence  that  I 
have  met  with,  is  to  be  found  in  the  Pamphlet  already  quo- 
ted, under  the  title  of  Fads  and  Evidences  on  the  Subject  of 
Baptism;  and  it  is  here  presented  to  the  reader. 

«  The  mischance  that  our  translators  should  have  used 
the  terms  hoiise  and  household  interchangeably,  though  scrip- 
ture preserves  the  distinction,  is  glaring  in  the  instance  of 
the  family  of  Onesiphorus,  which  in  one  text  is  rendered 
house,  in  the  other  household,  notwithstanding  the  same 
word  is  used  in  both  places;  and  the  same  persons  are  cer- 
tainly intended.     But,  it  has  proved  much  more  unfortunate. 


59 

Miat  oup  traifslittos's  have  used  one  woi'd,  households  to  ex- 
press botU  the   Jamil  If  and  tlic   household  of    Stephanas, 
though  Scripture  uses  rvfoxcords  in  order  to  mark  the  dis- 
tinrtion,  ami  certainly  docs  not  mean  the  same  persons. 
This  has  produced  confusion,  and   has  given  occasion  lo 
various  weak  and  inconsistent  arguments.     The  passage 
that  alludes  to  the.  famihj  of  StephaJias,  lias  no  dniculty: — 
but  that  respecting  tlie  household  of  Steplianas,   is  a  tissue 
of  dillicultics.     The  first  remark  on  it  is,  that,  as  it  stands, 
it  is  neither  Greek,  grammar,  nor  common  sense: — it  can- 
not he  regularly  construed;  ail  commentators  have  felt  this, 
and  have  attempted  to  force  it  into  sense  by  supplementary 
words.      Whitby   paraphrases   «  I  beseech   you   brethren 
[seeing]  ye  know  the  house  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the  first 
fruits   of  [tfic  gosqxi  in]  Achaia,  and  that  they  have  [ever 
si7icc]  addicted  themselves  to  the  ministry  of  the  Saints;  that 
you  submit  yourselves  to  such  [giving  Reverence  and  IIo- 
nour  to  them]  and  to  every  one  that  heli)eth  with  us  and  la- 
boureth."     Doddridge  renders,    <»  And  I  beseech  you  bre- 
thren AS  ye  know  the  Household  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is 
the  first  fruits  of  Achaia,   and  as  they  have  set  themselves 
to  ministring  to  the  Saints,  that  you  subject  yourselves  to 
such,  and  to  every  associate  in  that  good  work  and  labour." 
Bishop  Pearce,  with  a  greater  share  of  critical  sagacity 
than  the   former,  renders   *<  And  1  beseech  you,  brethren, 
HAVE  REGARD   to  tlic  family  of  Stephanas  [because  they 
ARE  the  first   fruits  of  Achaia,   and  have  set  themselves 
about  the  work  of  ministring  to  tlie  saints)  that  ye  would 
submit  yourselves  unto  such,  and  to  every  one  who  work- 
eth  with    them  and  laboureth.^     The  Bishop  saw  clearly 
that  "  IT  19,"  in   the   singular^  will    not  construe  with 
«  THEY  are"  h\  the  plural.     He  saw  too,  that  the  pbrase 
««  1  beseech  you  brethren" — must  have  an  immediate  sub- 
ject; and  theref<»rc  he  renders  "  1  beseech  you  have  re- 
gard."    In  his  notes  ho  gives  as  bis  reason  for  this  version 


^ 


frhat  many  MSS.  read  "  they  are  the  first  frifits" — and  to 
qualify  this  plural,  1  add,  some  copies  read  (vide  Pagninus, 
and  all  the  Latins) — "  Steplianas   and   Fortunatus  who 

ire" others  read    <<  Stephanas,  and   Fortunatus,  and 

Achaicus,  who  are" Those  are  sufficient  proofs  of  con- 
fusion, without  seeing  otiiers:  and  Justify  dissatisfaction 
with  the  passage  as  it  stands.  To  prepare  our  minds  for 
a  correct  view  of  the  place,  we  must  first  enquire,  what  is 
the  Apostle's  intention  in  writing  it?  and  to  answer  this 
question  we  must  consider  the  wliole  of  the  Apostle's  theme,* 
and  begin  our  enquiries  sor.ic  way  back. 

"The  first  thing  remarkable  is,  the  Apostle's  discrip- 
tion  of  Timothy,  verse  10,  *«  He  rOorketh  the  work — erga- 
csetai  ERGON, — of  the  Lord,  as  I  also  di)!"  the  next  is  that 
St.  Paul  desires  their  submission  to  co-workers — sijn&R- 
doNTi."  There  seems,  therefore,  to  be  a  mutual  reference 
between  these  words;  which  leads  us  to  infer,  that  he  who 
ffworkcth  tlje  work,  as  \also  do,"  must  be  a  co-worA'fr,  i.  e. 
co-worker  T//'i7/i  7)1^.  This  is  implied  in  the  \is  of  our  trans- 
lators: but  it  dismisses  the  **  associate  \n  that  g»od  work" 
of  Doddridge;  and  it  dismisses  the  »*  worketh  with  them'" 
of  Bishop  Pearce.  Let  us  see,  now,  whether  by  bringing 
these  words  somewhat  closer  togetlier,  we  may  not  disco- 
ver their  true  station. 

"  If  Timotliy  come  to  Corinth,  take  care  that  he  be  with- 
out fear  [or  vexation  fi'om  your  party  disputes]  among 
you;  for  he  worketh  the  work  of  the  Lonl,  as  1  also  do: 
Let  no  one,  therefore,  despise  hiiJi,  but  accompany  him  on 
his  journey,  tliat  he  may  come  to  me  in  sufety;  for  I  and 
the  brethren  expect  him.  And  as  to  Apollos  our  brother, 
I  and  the  brethren  exhorted  him  much  to  come  unt  >  you; 
but  he  was  by  no  means  inclined  to  come  now  [durlngyour 
party  dissentions]  yet,  he  will  come,  when  he  hath  a  con- 
venient season.  And  1  beseech  you,  brethren,  that  ye  sub- 
mit yourselves  unto  such  [as  Timothy  and  Apollos;  but 


61 


Timotliy,  especially,]  and  to  every  one  co-working  tvWi 
me,  and  labouring.*'  Uerc  every  thing  is  in  its  proper 
place,  and  reicrencr:  and  to  induce  their  greater  care  of 
Timothy,  when  he  arrived,  the  Apostle  reminds  them  that 
the  household  of  Stephanas  had  set  themselves  to  do  acts  of 
hospitality  and  kindness  to  Christian  ministers  and  bre- 
thren— suppose  on  their  journey: — at  once  an  example  and 
a  stimulus!  AVhy  did  not  St  Paul,  then,  recommend  Ti- 
motliy  to  lodge  at  that  residence? — Probably,  for  a  reason 
already  suggested;  that  Stephanas  resided  not  in  Corinth; 
but  at  some  small  distance  from  it,  in  Achaia.  The  Co- 
rinthian Church,  then,  was  not  exhorted  to  submit  itself  fo 
the  household  of  Stephanas;  the  notion  is  unreasonable:  the. 
cause  assigned  is  absurd.  What!  Crispus  and  Gaius,  with 
the  whole  ciiurch,  submit  themselves  to  the  servants  of  Ste- 
phanas, because  tliesc  servants  very  readily  and  cheerfully 
oflTcred  their  kind  assistance  to  travelling  brethren!  Wlicrc 
Is  the  congruity  between  cause  and  effect?  But  that  Cris- 
pus  and  Gaius,  with  the  Corinthian  Church,  might  shew 
all  deference  and  honour  to  Timothy,  might  lodge  and  en- 
tertain him  respectfully,  and  bring  him  forward  on  his 
journey,  with  every  mark  of  christian  attention,  is  exactly 
coincident  with  what  the  apostle  had  requested  before. 

**  It  is  well  known  that  the  concluding  chapter  of  other 
epistles — that  to  the  Romans,  for  instance,  is  composed  of 
memoranda,  addressed  by  the  Apostle  to  his  Christian 
friends;  and  when  introduced  into  tlie  text,  not  placed  pre- 
cisely in  due  order. — The  same  is  the  case  here;  and  the 
reference  to  the  household  of  Stephanas,  is  neitlier  more 
nor  less  than  a  marginal  note.  It  could  occasion  no  con- 
fusion, in  the  original,  from  the  manner  of  writing  it.— 
An  instance,  in  point,  as  practised  by  the  modern  Greeks, 
may  be  seen  in  a  facsimile,  given  in  Uobhouse's  Trarch 
in  Albania,  kc. 

^  Tho  whole,  I  conceive  stood  thns^ 
I 


62 


"  Now,  if  Timotheiis  come,  see  that  he  may  be 
with  you  witljout  fear;  for  he  worketh  the  work 
of  the  Lord,  as  I  also  work.     Let  no  man,  there- 
fore, despise  him;  but  conduct  him  forth  in  peace, 
that  he  may   come  unto  me,  for   1  look  for  him 
with    the   brethren.      As  touching   our   brother 
Apollos,   I  g-rcatly  desired  bim  to  come  to  you; 
but  his  will  was  not  to  come  at  this  time;  but  he 
Tom  know     will  comc  wbcn  he  shall  have  convenient  time. — 
toid^Tsi'e     ^^ •'^*^''  y^>  stand  fast  in  the  faith;  quit  you  like 
phunas,[in-   mcM:  be  strong.      Let  all  things  be  done  'with 
he"is^the      charity,  [and]  I  beseech  you,   brethren,  tbat  ye 
f.rst  fniits     submit  youeselvcs  to  such,  and  to  every  one  that 

of  Achaia] 

that  they       helpeth  With  nie  and  laboureth." 

have  set 
themselves 


"  I  am  glad  of  the  coming  of  Stephanas  and 
to  do  sei'vi-  Fortunatus  and  Achaicus:  for  that  which  was 
a)mmo"ia'.  lacking  ou  your  part  they  have  supplied.  For 
tion  fto       jiiey  J, aye  refreshed  my  spirit  and  yours:   there- 

jiiacoxize) 

fo  the  saints,  forc  ACKNOWLEDGE  them  that  are  such." 

"  Strange,  surely!  were  it  true  that  the  Apos- 
tle should  command  the  Corinthian  Church,  to 
SUBMIT  to  the  servants,  but  only  to  acknowledge 
the  master:  only  to  acknowledge  the  brother  who 
had  refreshed  his  s})irit,  and  the  spirits  of  the  Co- 
rinthians, to  wijom  he  writes;  but  to  submit  to 
his  servants,  whose  kindness,  though  extremely 
laudable,  terminated  on  strangers,  from  whom 
neith«>r  tlie  Corintliians  nor  Paul  had  received  the 
same  «*  rcfrcslmient*'  as  they  had  from  Stephanas. 
To  complete  this  absurdity,  observe,  that  Ste- 
phanas: as  a  member  of  the  Corinthian  Church, 
is  com  ^sanded  by  the  Apostle,  among  others,  to 
SUBMIT  (^^  giving  Reverence  and  Honour y'  as 
\V  hithy  paraphrases)  to  his  own  servants/  And 
this  becomes  absolutely   monstrous,    if   it   be 


63 


insisted  on,  tliat  these  were  the  sons  of  Stepiianns;  for  then, 
tliat  eminent  Christian,  a  hrother,  a  deputy  from  the 
Church,  the  Jirst  fruits  of  JlchaiUf  is  commanded  to  submit 
TO  HIS  OWN   cuilukkn!!!" 

The  haptism  of  tl»c  family  of  Cornelius  has  not  yet  been 
mentioned,  because  it  is  not  expressly  noticed  in  the  his- 
tory. There  can,  however,  be  no  reasonable  doubt  on  the 
subject.  The  family  with  which  Cornelius  was  accustom- 
ed to  worsliip  God,  woidd  surely  be  assembled  by  him  to 
hear  the  divinely  commissioned  apostle  who  came  to  show  the 
way  of  salvation;  to  speak  words  by  which  lie  and  all  his 
bouse  (dixog  family)  should  be  saved,  Acts  xi.  14.  We 
therefore,  fearlessly  put  down  the  family  of  Cornelius  as 
another  instance  of  family  baptism. 

The  family  of  Onesiphorus,  on  which  the  apostle  invokes 
blessings,  2  Tim.  i.  16;  and  which  he  aflTcctiouatcly  sa- 
lutes, 2  Tim.  iv.  19,  may,  in  ail  probability,  be  udtled  as 
another;  but  this  we  shall  not  urge.  Now,  without  again 
insisting  on  the  decisive  evidence  before  produced,  respect- 
ing the  direct  and  pi-oper  signification  of  the  word  OIKOS 
we  would  ask  any  one  to  take  as  many  families  as  are  re- 
carded  in  the  New  Testament  to  have  been  baptised,  abore 
him  or  below  him  on  the  street  where  he  resides,  or  in  the 
pew  which  he  occupies  in  church,  or  in  tlie  neighbourhood 
where  he  lives,  and  ascertain  wjietlier  he  can  iitid  as  many 
in  succession,  or  taken  promiscuously,  in  which  there  are 
no  children.  Let  him  calculate  the  probabilities  on  the 
subject:  in  other  words,  let  him  calculate  the  chances  that, 
as  the  course  of  nature  is,  six  households  may  be  taken 
promiscuously,  and  no  infants  be  found  in  Auy  of  them,  or 
rather  not  one  infant  found  among  them  all!  It  is  not  ex- 
travagant to  say,  that  there  would  be  thousands  and  thou- 
sands to  one  against  it.  The  evidence  then  against  the  sup- 
position that  the  apostles  did  not  baptise  infants,  as  it  ap- 
pears on  the  records  of  their  proceedings,    is   irresistible. 

In  counectioii  with  the  testimony  of  Scripture  respecting 


64 


the  practice  of  the  apostles,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  present 
a  brief  account  of  the  most  direct  and  explicit  testimonies 
of  the  Fathers.  And  for  this  purpose  we  present  the  fol- 
lowing extract  from  The  Virginia  Religious  Magazine,  Vol. 
II,  pp.  206-211. 

«  Origen,  a  man  of  most  extraordinary  genius  and 
learning,  was  born  towards  theclosc  of  the  second,  and  died 
about  the  middle  of  the  third  century.  From  his  wi'itings 
we  have  three  clear  testimonies  in  favour  of  infant  baptism. 
Tiie  first  is  in  his  14th  homily  on  Luke  "  Little  ones,  arc 
baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins."  And  again  in  the  same 
discourse  "  By  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  the  pollutions  of 
our  birth  are  put  off,  and  therefore  infants  are  baptized." — 
«  What  reason  can  be  given  for  the  practice  of  baptizing 
infants,  except  thisj  that  none  is  free  from  pollution,  no 
not  if  he  be  but  a  day  old." 

f<  The  second  testimony,  of  this  eminent  man,  is  in  his 
8th  sermon  on  Leviticus,  where  he  has  these  words  «<  Let 
it  be  inquired,  since  baptism  is  given  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  why,  according  to  the  usage  of  tlie  church,  that  bap- 
iisnif  is  given  to  infants." 

«  His  third  testimony,  is  found,  in  his  discourse  on  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans,  where  we  have  these  remarkable 
•yvords  *•'  The  church  hath  received  a  tradition  from  the  Jipos- 
Ues,  to  give  baptism  imto  infants." 

"  Cyprian,  was  made  bishop  of  Carthage,  in  the  year 
248,  and  ten  years  afterwards  received  the  crown  of  mar- 
tyrdom. The  year  before  his  death  (viz.  257)  he  sat  in 
council  with  sixty-six  bishops,  wliose  decrees  may  be  seen 
in  his  Epist.  (58)  to  Fidus,  which  is  still  extant.  Fidus 
had  proposed  the  question  whether  it  was  lawful  for  infants 
to  be  baptized  on  the  second  or  third  day;  or  whether  it 
was  necessary  to  wait  until  the  eiglith,  as  was  directed  in 
the  case  of  circumcision.  By  the  way,  it  may  be  observed, 
that  the  propounding  of  such  a  question,  shews  that  at  that 
time,  it  was  commonly  believed  that  baptism  held  the  same 


65 

l)!acc  in  the  New  which  circiimciBion  occupied  in  the  Old 
dispensatiun:  and  that  no  doubts  were  at  that  time  enter- 
tained of  the  right  of  infants  to  baptism.  But  if  this  truth 
were  not  sulliciently  evident  from  merely  proposing  such 
a  question  to  a  lunncrous  council  of  bishops,  tlieir  unani- 
mous answer,  will  remove  every  shadow  of  doubt.  They 
determined  without  a  dissentint^  voice,  *<  Tliat  the  mercy 
and  grace  of  God  ought  not  to  be  denied  to  any  infant, 
however  young — that  if  anj  were  to  be  kept  from  baptism, 
it  should  be  rath«M-  those  of  full  age  who  have  committed 
great  sins:  but  since  these,  when  they  embrace  the  faith,  are 
not  prohibited  from  baptism,  much  more  ought  not  the  in- 
fant to  be  forbidden  who  being  new-born  hath  no  sin  but 
that  which  he  hath  derived  from  .Vdam  by  his  birth" — In 
the  conclusion  they  say  "  that  as  none  were  to  be  refused 
baptism,  so  especially  this  was  to  be  held  and  observed 
with  respect  to  infants  and  new-born  children." 

**  Here  then,  we  have  tlic  testimony  of  a  whole  council, 
ronsistihg  of  above  sixty  bishops  in  favor  of  infant  baptism; 
and  as  tliey  were  not  brought  together  to  decide  this  ques- 
tion, the  unanimity  of  sdch  a  number,  may  be  considered  as 
decisive  evidence,  that  in  the  time  of  Cyprian,  there  was 
but  one  opinion  and  one  practice  in  the  wh«»le  Christian 
church,  with  respect  to  infant  baptism.  If  they  had  been 
collected,  to  determine  whether  infants  ought  to  be  bap- 
tized, it  would  have  furnished  evidence,  whatever  their  de- 
sign might  be,  that  tlicrc  were  some  antipedobaptists  at 
that  time,  for  it  was  not  usual  for  councils  to  meet,  for  the 
consideration  of  questions,  not  disputed.  But  as  the  ques- 
tion before  them  was,  whether  infants  might  lawfully  be 
baptized  before  the  eighth  day;  whilst  they  gave  their  opi. 
nion  upon  this  point,  they  implicitly  teach  us,  not  ofily, 
that  they  all  believed  in  infant  baptism,  but  that  nobody 
else  doubted  of  it. 

**  As  to  the  authenticity,  ;>nd  genuineness  of  the  Epistle 
of  Cyprian,  which  contains  the  decrees  of  this  council,  wc 


66 


Jiave  the  fullest  satistaction.  It  is  quoted  by  Jerome,  in 
his  dialogue  against  the  Pelagians;  and  Augustine  cites  it 
more  than  once,  and  sets  it  down  almost  entire,  as  a  testi- 
mony of  great  weight  against  Heretics.  In  his  28th  epist. 
to  Hieronymus,  he  says,  «*  Blessed  Cyprian  decreed  with 
^  number  of  his  fellow-bishops,  that  a  child  new-born, 
might  be  properly  baptized,  not  thereby  making  any  new 
decree  but  retaining  the  faith  of  the  church,  before  most 
firmly  established." 

*<  About  the  same  period,  lived  the  author,  whose  work 
goes  under  the  name  of  l)i<»nysius  the  Areoj)agite.  In  his 
discourse  concerning  the  Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy,  hepropo- 
seth  it  as  a  question;  "  why  children  who  cannot  yet  under- 
stand, arc  notwithfitanding  made  partakers  of  the  saered 
Mrth  from  God."  By  wliich  baptism  is  undoubtedly  in- 
tended. In  answer  to  this  question,  he  says,  "  Many 
things  of  whicli  we  do  not  now  see  the  reason  arc  worthy  of 
God — We  affirm  of  this  the  same  things,  which  our  divim 
pddes  have  handed  down  to  us."  Again,  «*  Our  divine 
guides  appointed  that  infants  should  be  admitted  after  the 
sacred  manner."  By  divine  guides,  saith  Maxentius,  "is 
fineant  the  Apostles."  Which  is  evident  enough.  It 
ouglit  not  to  prejudice  the  testimony  of  this  writer,  that  his 
book  has  been  falsely  ascribed  to  Dionysius  tlie  convert 
ui'  St.  Paul  at  Athens;  for  this  iias  come  to  pass  in  all  pro- 
bability, through  the  ignorance  of  transcribers,  who  finding 
llie  author's  name  to  be  Bionysius,  hastily  supposed  that 
lie  was  the  very  person  mentioned  in  the  Acts.  It  is  agreed 
by  all,  that  the  writer  was  a  very  learned  man  and  his  an- 
tiquity will  appear  from  this  circumstance,  that  as  early 
as  the  year  420  Theodorus  debated  the  question,  whether 
or  not  the  author  was  Dionysius  the  Aregopagitc. 

"  Gregory  Nazianzen,  flourished  about  the  middle  of 
the  fourth  century.  From  him  we  have  the  following  tes- 
timony: "  If  thou  hast  an  infant,  let  not  iniquity  get  time, 
but  let  it  be  sanctijiedi  let  it  be  consecrated  to  the  Spirit:  and 


67 

wliereas  the  llctithcus  use  rharins,  ahd  anmlets  to  secure 
their  children,  ^h^  you  hrstow  on  them  the   Trinity,  that 
great  and  .qood  phyhutei-y  or  preservative."— O rat.  4,  on 
Baptism.     In  the  same  discourse  he  says;  «<  What  shall 
we  say  concerning  those  that  arc  yet  children,  and  neither 
know  the  loss,  nor   are  sensihlc  of  the  i;race  of  haptisra? 
Shall  we  also  haptize  them?"  To  whi(  h  lie  answers;  "  Yes 
by  all  means,  if  any  danger  i»ress,  they  should  be  sanctified, 
when  they   have  no  sense  of  it,  that  they  may  not  die  un- 
sealed  and  uninitiated."     In   proof  of  this  he  observes, 
that,  circumcision,  uhich  was  a  sacramental  seal  [^xxflocri 
C^ioayi^)  was  used  to  those  that  had  no  exercise  of  reason. 
After  this,  it  is  true,  he  proceeds  to  give  his  own  privat<^ 
opinion,   that  tliosc  children   who  were    in   no  danger  of 
death;  miglit  defer  it,  until  about  three  years  of  age,  when 
they  might  be  taught  to  answer  something,  although  they 
did  not  understand  the  meaning  of  tlic  words. 

«<  In  the  same  century,  lived  Ambrose:  speaking  of  those 
who  made  Adam's  sin  no  otherwise  hurtful  to  posterity 
than  by  the  example,  he  presses  them  with  this  absurdity, 
that  their  opinion,  "  nullifies  tlic  baptism  of  infants,  which 
in  this  case,  would  be  capable  of  adoption,  but  not  of  par- 
don." He  says  in  another  place,  "  Ky  Jordan's  being 
driven  back,  are  signified  the  mysteries  of  baptism,  by 
which  the  little  ones  that  are  baptised  are  cleansed ^from 
the  sin  of  their  natural  state." 

«  In  tlic  close  of  this  age  also,  lived  Chrysostom,  whose 
deatli  is  placed  in  -407 — one  of  the  most  celebrated  preach- 
ers of  anti(iuity.  In  his  homily  to  the  Neophyti,  he  has 
these  words,  «<  For  this  cause  we  baptize  children  although 
they  have  no  sin."  These  words  deserve  to  be  particular- 
ly noticed,  because  the  Pelagians  made  a  great  handle  oi 
them  in  the  dispute  about  original  sin.  They  inteq)reted 
the  words,  as  though  Chrysostom  had  said,  that  infants 
were  free  from  original  sin;  But  Augustine  confuted  them. 


6B 


by  referring  to  the  word  (ccfiaplyifmla)  used  by  Chryaos- 
tom,  which  properly  signifies  actual  sins.  Again,  in  his 
4th  homily  on  Genesis  speaking  of  baptism  as  the  christi- 
an circumcision,  he  says,  «  It  liath  no  determinative  time 
but  is  lawful  in  chilhood,  middle  life  and  old  age." 

*•'  Jerome,  was  born  in  342  and  lived  until  420,  and  is 
esteemed  one  of  the  most  learned  of  the  Fathers.  In  his 
9th  Epist.  to  Lata,  he  says;  »'  Unless  you  believe  that 
those  children  of  Christians  who  receive  not  baptism,  are 
the  guilty  persons,  and  not  their  parents  who  neglected  to 
bring  them  to  Christ's  embraces,"  &c. 

<*  In  his  dialogue  against  Pelagius;  (lib.  3)  the  question 
being  a.skcd  by  Crito;  Why  infants  are  baptized,  Atticus 
answers;  "  That  their  sins  may  be  pardoned" — And  again 
*<  the  infant  is  freed  in  baptism  from  the  bond  of  Adam's 
sin." 

*<  Paujinus,  was  cotemporary  with  Jerome,  from  whom 
we  have  this  testimony;  *<  The  Priest  brings  the  infant 
out  of  the  font,  white  as  snow,  in  body,  in  heart,  in  habit." 

*<  Next  comes  that  great  champion  of  Orthodoxy,  St. 
Augustine,  who  was  born  in  the  4th,  and  died  in  the  5th 
century.  The  passages  in  his  writings  in  which  infant 
baptism  is  expressly  mentioned  and  vindicated,  are  too 
numerous  to  bo  (quoted.  But  he  atTirms  that  it  had  been 
the  perpetual  doctrine  of  tlie  whole  church  in  all  ages  be- 
fore him,  expressly  including  that  of  the  apostles. 

*'  In  his  discourse  concerning  baptism  written  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  Donatists  Lib.  4.  c.  23,  he  has  these  words, 
«  This  is  held  as  tradition  by  the  universal  churclh  when 
«  little  infants  are  baptized  which  certainly  are  not  yet 
«  able  to  believe  with  the  heart,  or  confess  with  the  mouth, 
<*  and  yet  no  christian  will  say  that  they  are  baptized  to 
*»  no  purpose."  He  then  proceeds  to  observe,  that  as  in 
the  case  of  Isaac  the  seal  of  the  righteousness  itself  fol- 
lowwl  in  riper  age,  so  also,  "  In  baptized  infants  the  sa- 
crament of  regeneration  precedes,  and  if  they  hold  fast 


t>9 


dtristian  piety,  conversion  in  the  heart  follows,  the  mys- 
tery whereof  hath  been  already  received  in  the  body." 

"  Speakinij;,  in  another  place,  of  infant  ba])tism  he  says, 
*«  The  doctrine  itself  gives  ns  no  trouble,  being  long  since 
«  establislicd  in  the  christian  ciiurch,  by  the  highest  au- 
thority." Again,  "  The  question  between  them  and  ns  is 
not  whether  infants  are  to  be  baptized;  for  that  infants 
should  he  baptized  nobody  donhfs;  and  although  they  con- 
tradict us  on  the  question  which  relates  to  its  benefit,  yet 
of  this  they  entertain  no  doubt." 

«  In  this  dispute  with  the  Pelagians,  he  says,  "  Doth 
Christ  profit  infants  that  are  baptized,  or  doth  he  not? — 
He  must  needs  say,  that  he  doth  profit,  because  he  is  prest 
with  the  authority  of  the  church  our  mother" — "If  they 
«  say  that  Christ  does  not  profit  infants  baptized,  they  of 
<'  necessity  affirm  that  infants  are  superfluously  baptized, 
«  but  this,  tliese  very  heritics  dare  not  say,  for  they  fly  to 
«  this  evasion,  that  they  are  not  baptized  for  salvation,  but 
•'  for  tiie  kingdom  of  heaven." 

»'  Epist.  59.  "  The  baptism  of  infants  is  not  superflu- 
ous, in  order  that  by  regeneration  they  may  be  freed  from 
the  condemnation  received  from  Adam." 

"  Enchiridion  c.  42.  «  From  the  infant  new-born  to 
dccrepi<l  old  age,  none  are  to  be  prohibited  from  baptism." 

<«  I  will  conclude  this  list  of  testimonies  by  producing 
the  decrees  of  the  councils  of  Carthage  and  Miletus  on  this 
point;  both  of  these  sat  about  the  beginning  of  the  5th  cen- 
tury. 

"  Whosoever  denies  that  infants  are  by  the  baptism  of 
Christ  freed  from  perdition,  and  made  partakers  of  eter- 
nal life,  let  him  be  anathema." 

<«  In  the  second  it  is  said,  that  the  catholic  church  eve- 
ry where  difl^used,  always  understood  and  asserted  that 
this  was  an  Apostolical  practice." 


79 


This  testimony  is  so  illustrated  and  confirmed  by  scrii>»' 
ture,  that  it  comes  to  every  unprejudiced  understanding 
with  great  force. 

Having  now,  as  seems  to  me,  fully  established  the  doc- 
trine, that,  according  to  divine  appointment,  the  sacra- 
mt*nt  of  cliristian  baptism  is  to  be  applied  to  the  families 
of  believersj  it  may  be  well  to  consider  some  what  particu- 
larly  that  part  of  the  general  proposition  laid  down  in  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  which  states  that,  "  Infants  descend- 
ing from  parents  either  both,  or  but  one  of  them,  professing 
faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to  him"  are  to  be  baptised. 
And  here  it  may  be  remarked,  that  in  the  instances  adduced 
from  scripture,  there  is,  perliaps,  not  one,  in  which  more 
than  one  parent  is  mentioned.  Farther,  in  every  instance 
of  the  baptism  of  a  family,  it  is  clearly  ascertained,  and 
generally,  expressly  stated,  that  the  parent  presenting 
children  for  baptism,  believed.  In  the  case  of  Lydia,  al- 
though not  a  syllable  is  said  of  the  faith  of  her  family,  it  is 
said,  in  very  emphatical  terms,  that  the  Lord  opened  her 
heart  to  attend  to  the  things  which  were  spoken  by  Paul. — 
And  with  this  declaration,  is  connected  the  account  of  her 
baptism  and  that  of  her  children.  The  stress  is  laid  on  the 
circumstance  of  Lydia*s  heart  being  opened,  or  her  believing. 
Hence,  while  the  narrative  authorises  and  requires  indeed, 
the  baptising  of  children,  it  requires  faith  in  the  parent. 

In  the  case  of  the  Jailor,  too,  the  belief  of  only  one  pa- 
rent is  mentioned.  And  in  general,  it  may  be  laid  down 
as  a  rule  founded  on  apostolic  practice,  that  either  both  or 
one  of  the  parents,  should,  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  cate- 
chism, profess  faith  and  obedience. 

But  there  is  a  passage  of  scripture,  which,  while  it,  in 
Tery  strong  terms,  sanctions  the  particular  application  of 
christian  baptism  which  we  are  vindicating,  has  a  decisive 
bearing  on  the  particular  question  under  consideration.  1 
Cor.  vii.  14,  «  For  the  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified 
by  the  wife^  and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  sanctified  by  th« 


71 

husband:  else  were  your  cliildrcn  unclean;  but  now  arc 
tlicy  holy."  The  primary  and  proper  meaning  of  the  word 
(AriAZSl)  ^^^^  rendered,  sanctify,  is  to  separate  from  a 
common  and  profane,  and  to  consecrate  to  a  particular  and 
sacred  use;  and  the  word  rendered  holy^  (f^yiog)  derived 
from  the  verb,  signifies,  that  which  is  thus  separated  and  con- 
aecrated;  and  when  applied  in  the  scriptures  to  persons, 
IS  uniformUj  limited  to  those  ivho  are  visibly  the  people  of 
God,  and  received  into  his  church. 

♦'  Thus  the  Jews,  with  their  children,  were  called  a  holy 
nation,*  not  because  tiiey  all  truly  loved  and  served 
God;  for  this  they  did  not:  but  because  they  were  his  pro- 
fessing, visible  people,  separated  to  be  such  from  the  other 
nations  of  the  earth.  Thus  visible  Christians  are  denomi* 
nated  holy,  or  saintsjf  and  aracnigst  them  the  Apostle  in- 
clu<los  the  children  of  the  believer.  I  conclude,  therefore, 
that  they  are  the  proper  subjects  of  that  ordinance  which 
is  the  sign  of  their  dedication  to  God,  and  the  regular  door 
of  admission  into  the  visible  church. 

•<  Our  brethren  acknowledge  that  the  common  meaning 
of  the  wordAo/j/,  which  is  here  applied  to  the  children  of 
the  believer,  is  as  I  have  stated.  But  they  object,  that  the 
aame  thing  is  applied  to  the  unbelieving  parent,  who  is  also 
said  to  be  sanrtified  or  made  holy  by  the  believer.  If, 
therefore,  this  holiness  prove  the  baptism  of  the  children,  they 
urge  that  it  will  prove  that  of  the  unbelieving  parent  also. 
And  to  avoid  both  these,  they  assert  that  the  h  oliness  here 
mentioned  must  mean  something  quite  different  from  what 
it  does  in  all  other  places.  Of  this  singular  meaning  I 
shall  speak  at  large  presently. 

"  In  answer  to  the  objection,  I  must  observe  that  there 

•  34.  Exod.  xix.  6.  ^nd  ye  shall  be  urUa  me  a  kingdom  of  priests,  and 
an  holy  nation. 

I  1  Fet.  ii.  9.  Te  are  a  chosen  generation,  a  royal  priestho$d,  a  htb 
nation,  a  peculiar  people.    See  the  New  Testament  genenUI/. 


72 

IS  some  inaccuracy  in  the  translation  of  this  text.     The 
Apostle,  speaking  of  the  parents,  uses  the  past,   not  the 
present  time.*     The  true  version  is,  the  unbeliever  hath 
been  sanctijied  by  the  believer.    The  Apostle  is  answering 
the  question,  whether  a  believer  might  huvfully  continue 
in  the  marriage  state  with  the  unbeliever?     His  decision 
is  that  they  should  not  separate  and  he  appears  to  reason 
thus  upon  the  point.     <  Let  them   continue  together;   for 
there  have  been  instances  heretofore  of  unbelievers  brought 
to  tlie  faith  and  profession  of  the  true  religion,  and  into  the 
church  of  Christ,  by  means  of  their  believing  partners:  and 
there  is  reason  to  hope  for  the  same  thing  in  future.     And 
were  it  not  for  this  consoling  prospect,  your  children  would 
be  considered  unclean,  would  not  be  admitted   into  the 
church:  for  there  would  not  be  sufficient  ground  to  hope  that 
they  would  be  trained  up  as  becometh  Christians,  which  is 
the  great  reason  why  any  are  received  into  the  visible 
church.     But  now  are  they  holy,  received  into  the  church 
by  baptism,  just  as  thet  would  be  if  both  parents 
WEKE  believers,*     Tbis  interpretation  appears  to  set 
the  whole  matter  in  a  natural  and  intelligible  light.     It 
completely  removes  the  objection,  by  assigning  to  the  holi. 
ness  here  attributed  to  the  parents  and  the  children  an  uni- 
form meaning,  namely  that  of  dedicaiton  to  God;   w^hich, 
at  the  same  time,  is  the  uniform  scriptural  use  of  the  word. 


*  The  original  is,  Uyux^at  yap  6  avyjp  6  amalog,  ^c.  / 
make  no  apology  for  recurring  so  frequently  to  critical  emen- 
dations of  our  version  of  the  scriptures.  It  is,  in  the  general, 
an  excellent  one.  But,  whether  people  choose  to  know  it  or 
not,  the  fact  is,  that  our  English  translation  of  the  Bible  is 
the  work  of  men  uninspired  and  fallible,  however  learned  and 
upright.  The  original  scriptures  alone  are  our  infallible 
standard;  and  they  are  as  open  to  investigation  now  as  evei^ 
they  were. 


78 


«  Accordiii!^  to  our  hrothron,  the  Apostlr's  nieanint;;  l.s, 
•liat  the  chihlivn  were  !e.i;iti m:\tf,  not  bastanls.  Is  not 
ihi.s  sulliriently  i«  ftilrd  by  the  fact,  tluit  thoujrh  this  word, 
holy,  with  its  derivatives  is  used  about  six  hutwlred  times 
in  the  scrijitun's,  it  never  has.  nor  is  any  where  else  pre- 
tended to  have  any  such  meaning?  But  besides;  if  this  bo 
indeed  the  Apostle's  meaning,  about  what,  I  pray,  is  he  ar- 
guinq?  For  he  evidently  does  furni  an  argument  abou< 
something.  Dnes  he  infer  that  tlic  parents  had  been  law- 
fully married  to  each  other,  because  tlieir  children  were 
legitimate?  Nothing  could  be  more  absurd;  for  the  legiti- 
macy of  children  must  ever  take  for  granted  the  validity  of 
their  parents'  mai-riage,  instead  of  proving  it.  Does  the 
Apostle  mean  to  inform  them,  that  if  they  had  not  been  law- 
fully married,  their  children  would  have  been  bastards? 
Wonderful  instruction  this  indeed!  In  fiw\  the  question 
was  not,  whether  the  marriage  had  been  rightly  formed  ac- 
cording to  the  laws  of  their  country,  nor  whether  their 
children  were  legitimate  or  not;  for  these  things  they  must 
have  known  rpiite  as  well  as  the  Apostle:  hut  whether 
Christianity  did  not  so  influence  and  modify  the  marriage 
relation,  tliJit  when  one  of  the  parties  became  a  believer,  he 
or  she  should  separate  from  the  unbeliever:  a  point  on 
which  the  early  converts  miglit  naturally  enough  start  a 
scruple.  To  this  question  our  brethren's  interpretation  of 
the  text  exhibits  no  shadow  of  an  answer.  Ours  on  the 
other  hand,  applies  directly  to  the  question.  Tlie  parents 
are  commanded  not  to  separate,  because  there  is  reason, 
from  past  experience,  to  hope  that  the  believer  may  con- 
vert the  unbeliever.  And  the  lawfulness  of  their  continu- 
ing together  is  farther  illustrated  by  an  allusion  to  the  well 
known  practice  of  baptizing  their  children.  Whether  this 
exposition  be  not  every  way  moi-c  worthy  of  acceptance 
t!ian  that  of  our  brethren,  1  leave  to  ovrry  impartial  inqui- 
rer after  truth  to  determine." 


74 


We  havenowshown  that  the  Church  of  God  was  organiz- 
ed in  the  house  (family)  of  Abraham;  that  the  initiatory  or- 
dinance was  applied  to  children  from  that  time  to  the  com- 
ing of  Christ;  that  no  excluding  precept  was  given  by  our 
blessed  Saviour;  that  the  apostles  in  executing  their  com- 
mission would  naturally  and  of  course  include  infants  in 
the  number  of  disciples;  that  they  did  in  fact  in  many  in- 
stances baptise  families  in  which,  according  to  the  course 
of  nature  there  must  have  been  infants;  and  finally,  that 
the  Fathers  o£  the  C!»ristian  church  do  unequivocally  tes- 
tify that  the  baptism  of  children  was  received  from  the 
apostles.  And  this,  1  think  fully  supports  the  doctrine,  and 
authorises  the  practice  which  I  have  undertaken  to  vindi- 
cate;   that     *«  Not    only   those    who    do  actualit 

PROFESS  FAITH  IN,    AND  OBEDIENCE  UNTO    ChRIST,  BUT 
AXSO  THE  INFANTS  OF  ONE  OR  B  »TH  BELIEVING  PARENTS, 

ARE  TO  BE  BAPTISED."      Westminster  Confession,   Chap. 
xxviii.  §  4. 

PART  III. 

ON   THE   MODE   OF    ADMINISTERING   BAPTISM. 

The  investigation  which  I  have  made  of  this  subject  has 
resulted  in  the  conviction  that, 

«  Dipping  of  the  person  into  the  water  is  not  necessary; 
hut  baptism  is  rightly  administered  by  pouring  or  sprinkling 
water  upm  the  person."  Westminster  Confession,  Chap. 
xxviii.  §  3. 

Before  considering  the  scriptural  evidence  in  favour  of 
this  proposition,  I  would  offer  one  or  two  general  remarks 
to  the  consideration  of  the  reader. 

1.  The  Christian  religion  every  where  regards  matters 
of  mere  mode  and  form  as  trivial  and  unimportant.  Its 
great  object  is,  to  bring  men  to  worship  the  one  living  and 
true  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  To  accomplish  this  a  vi- 
sible cburcli  was  instituted,  ordinances  were  appointed,  and 


75 


external  worship  required. — But  no  form  has  been  prescribed 
in  which  we  must  sing  the  praises  of  (lod,  or  offer  iirayers 
lo  the  AImi,a;lity:  no  particular  posture  in  prayer  or  at  the 
table  of  the  Lord  has  been  pointed  out;  nor,  as  we  believe, 
has  any  particular  mode  of  aduiinistcrint^  baptism  l)ci'n 
prescribed.  It  would  indeed  be  strausje,  had  a  prescription 
in  this  particular  contravened  the  genius  and  spirit  of  our 
religion. 

2.  Christianity  was  doubtless  intended  by  its  au- 
thor for  a  universal  religion.  A  contrai-y  supposition 
would  go  against  some  of  the  very  best  hopes  of  the 
church,  and  some  of  the  clearest  predictions  of  holy  writ.  A 
religion  intended  forall  nations,  must,in  its  appointments  be 
adapted  to  the  physical  condition  of  the  whole  human  race: 
and  to  the  particular  circumstances  of  all  individuals.  A 
rite,  to  which  all  ought  to  submit,  ought  to  be  suited  to 
the  case  of  all.  Thus  the  initiatory  sacrament  of  the 
church  ought  to  be  suited  to  the  most  intemperate  regions 
of  the  north,  and  to  the  most  burning  and  barren  sands  of 
the  desert:  to  the  countries  where  water  abounds,  and 
where  it  is  most  scarce  and  precious:  it  ought,  too,  to  suit 
a  person  of  the  most  delicate  health,  as  well  as  one  of  the 
most  vigorous  constitution,  one  labouring  under  fatal  dis- 
ease, as  well  as  in  the  bloom  of  youth.  But  if  submersion 
IS  necessary  to  the  due  admini»)tration  of  baptism,  then 
this  adaptation,  this  suitableness  does  not  exist.  And  this, 
may  well  be  regarded  as  a  strong  presumption  against  the 
restriction  of  baptism  to  any  particular  mode  of  adminis- 
tration: especially  when  it  is  considered  that  baptism  is  a 
sign,  and  that  the  thing  signified  may  be  as  well  expres- 
sed by  a  spoonful  as  by  an  ocean  of  water.  In  establish- 
ing the  proposition  laid  down,  I  shall  show, 

1.  That  the  oi-iginal  word  is  not  used  by  Greek  writers 
in  general,  in  the  determinate  and  fixed  sense  of  immer- 
sion. 2.  That  the  examples  of  baptism  recorded  in  scrip- 
ture, do  not  limit  the  rite  to  the  mudo  just  specified.     3. 


76 


That  the  allusions,  wluch  arc  made  in  scripture  to  tlic 
thing  siguiiied  by  baptism  generally,  imply  modes  different 
from  that  of  immersion. 

Fur  proof  of  the  first  proposition,  reference  is  made  to 
the  first  part  of  this  Essay,  page  2d,  and  the  following. — 
In  addition,  we  off.;r  the  following  authorities.  Origen,  a 
Greek  Father,  and  one  of  the  most  learned  men  of  his  age, 
says,  "  Elias  did  not  baptise  tiio  wood  on  the  altar  which 
was  to  he  washed,  hut  ordered  another  to  do  it,"  &c. — 
Here  he  alludes  to  1  Kings,  xviii.  53.  <•  And  he  put  the 
wood  in  order,  and  cut  the  hullock  in  pieces,  and  laid  him 
on  the  wood,  and  said  Fill  four  barrels  with  water,  and 
pour  it  on  the  burnt  sacrifice  and  on  the  wood.  Here  bap- 
tise is  used  by  Origen  as  equivalent  to  j^our  on. 

Athanasius,  (Tim.  I.  p.  219,  Edit.  Commel.)  used  the 
word  (^oavli^ouevov)  sprinkled,  as  clearly  equivalent  to 
{SanliCp^vov)  baptised. 

An  ancient  orarle,  quoted  by  Sydenham,  runs  thus: — 
Aaxog  ffanli^s;  Swm  Ss  lot  a  Befitg  egIl.  i-  e.  Baptise  him  as 
a  bottle;  but  it  is  not  lawful  to  immerse,  or  wholly  to  plunge 
him  under  water.  Here  the  word  baptise,  is  put  in  oppo- 
sition to  immerse  or  plunge,  and  therefore  cannot  mean  the 
same  thing. 

To  this  it  may  be  added,  that  the  oldest  and  most  learn- 
ed Lexicographers  translate  the  word,  Sanli^Q,  by  the  fol- 
lowing Latin  terms:  Tingo,  intingo,  mergo,  immergo,  la- 
vo,  abluo,  madefacio,  purgo,  mundo.  That  is,  they  give 
to  the  original  word  no  less  than  seven  different  significa- 
tions. We  are  justified  then  in  affirming,  that  it  ought  by 
no  means  to  be  limited  to  the  one  signification  of  immersion. 

Again,  it  is  observed  that  the  Greek  language  is  very 
copious,  and  furnishes  better  opportunity  to  express  with 
precision  the  various  shades  of  meaning  in  words,  than 
perhaps  an^  other  known  tongue.      We  find  a  variety  of 


in 


words  it)  it,  cxiJiessivc  of  diflTcrcnt  applications  of  water. 
For  instance,  Pavli^a  signifies  to  sprinkle;  Ex;^fa)  to  pour 
<"t^;  Aaw  f(>  wash;  Awu  oi"  Avnla  to  plunge;  kc.  &c.  Now, 
had  our  blessed  Lord  designed  to  prescribe  a  particular 
mode  of  administering  I)aptism,  it  seems  fair  to  conclude, 
that  a  word  designating  that  mode,  would  havi;  been  used. 
Instead  of  this,  we  find  constantly  employed,  a  word  which 
has  cr)ufcssedly  seven  varieties  of  signification.  Does  not 
this  justify  tlic  conclusion,  tliat  our  Lord  intended,  that  the 
mode  should  be  left  indifferent?  And  if  so,  arc  we  at  liber- 
ty to  limit  and  tie  down  to  a  particular  manner,  that  which 
Jesus  Christ  has  left  undetermined?  Attempts  to  do  this, 
have  produced  more  than  half  the  rents  and  schisms,  that 
have  divided  and  disturbed  the  church. 

But  perhaps  it  may  be  tiiought  by  some  that,  although 
the  word  baptise  is  thus  general  in  its  signification,  it  is  so 
limited  in  the  New  Testament  usage,  as  to  rcrpiire  submer- 
sion, to  complete  the  rite.  Let  us  examine.  And  here 
every  one  ought  to  lay  aside  the  prejudices  of  the  partizan, 
and  enter  the  investigation  with  the  coolness  of  an  impar- 
tial critic. 

The  word  ^anli^iJ  occurs  in  various  forms  in  the  New 

Testament,  sixty-four  times.     As  it  is  intended  to  do  full 

justice  to   the  subject,  these  passages  will   be  recited;  and 

such  remarks  offered  as  the  occasion  may  suggest. 

No.  I.     Matt.  iii.  5,  6.     "  Then  went  out  to    him  [John]  Jerusalem  and 

all  Judea  and  all  the  region   round   about  Jordan;  and  rKo(I7t7<- 

^Ovlo  EV  TW  looodVI^)  were  baptised  of  him  in  Jordan,  confessing 

their  sins." 

This  is  as  strong  a  passage  as  any  produced  from  the  N. 
Testament  in  support  of  the  opinion  that  baptism  was  per- 
formed by  immersion.  But  does  it  warrant  the  conclusion 
which  has  been  drawn  fron)  it?     First  it  is  observed, 

I.  That  the  account  here  given  respects  the  baptism  of 
John,  which  was  a  local  and  temporary  institution;  and 
therefore  cannot  ccrtaiidy  decide  concerning  an  ordinance 
L 


78 


equally  intendpd  for  th o/roaeii  regions  of  Greenland   and 
tlif  thirsty  ()lalns  of  AMca;  for  the  healthy  and  the  sick. 

2.  The  word  iSanli^cd  is,  as  wc  have  seen,  a  general, 
in<!et(M'minate  word — Does  the  Greek  preposition  (jev)  here 
rorj;leri'd  in,  fix  the  meaning  so  as  to  determine  the  mode 
in  whirh  Jolin  administered  haptisin?  It  is  derived  fi'om 
a  Hebrew  woi-d,  tlie  gi  neral  idea  of  which  is,  presence  with; 
and  it  is  used  by  the  New  Testament  writers  in  at  least 
sixteen  different  senses — and  these  among  them.  In, 
Among,  With.  By,  Through,  For,  Of,  To/Fowards,  JNigh 
to.  Into,  Consistijjgof,  Acroi-ding  to.  When,  That.  Can  a 
preposition  used  in  so  many  various  senses,  then,  fix  and  li- 
mit the  signification  of  a  verb  so  indefinite  as,  baptise'^  Sup- 
pose baptise  means  (\(^tin'\te\y  to  sprinkle  or  pour  water  on 
one;  then  it  would  be  most  natural  to  render  the  words  quo- 
ted above  THEY  WERE  sPRiiVKLED  by  him,  or  water  was 
poured  on  them  by  him,  near  to  Jordan.  Suppose  that  it 
means  to  wash,  then  the  baptised  persons  might  have  stood 
near  the  margin  of  the  river,  or  in  the  water,  and  the  flu- 
id might  have  been  still  poured  on  them.  But  here  is  no 
siibmersion  The  matter  then  is  still  undecided.  Is  tliere 
any  thing  in  the  rircumstances  d;  tailed  in  connection  with 
the  use  of  the  word,  uliicli  can  settle  the  question?     It   is 

answered We   read   that   "  Jerusalem,    and   all  Judea, 

and  all  the  country  round  about  Jordan,"  that  is,  the  peo- 
ple of  all  these  places  went  out  to  be  baptised  by  John. 
There  may  be  some  dispute  what  is  the  piopi  i'  im|>ori  of 
these  words.  Did  the  Kvangelist  mean  tirat  all  the  peo- 
ple of  the  places  specified,  went  out  to  be  baptised.  Then 
the  multitudes  must  ha  e  been  immensely  great.  One 
may  well  believe  this,  who  recollects  the  statement  of  Jo- 
sephus,  that  eleven  hundred  thousand  peisons  were  taken 
or  slain,  when  Jerusalem  was  taken  by  Titus,  But  if  the 
words  are  not  to  be  conslrued  literally;  we  must  suppose,  to 
justify  the  figiirati\  e  language  of  the  Evangelist,  that  a  large 


79 

proportion  nj  the  people  fluckfd  (o  tlip  banks  oC  Jordnii  for 
baptism.  Now  il'  Jolin  baptised  oiil}  oin'  lenlli  pari  i^f  Hit 
popiilafion  mciiticnied  b}  tbc  bist<irian;  sii|>posiiis^  that  be 
did  tbis  by  siibincrsion.  and  that  bi'  baptised  one  in  tlie 
space  of  every  tbrec  minutes,  be  must  bave  stiiod  eigbt 
hotifs  per  day  in  tbe  water  lor  tbne  yearn  to  bave  arcom- 
plisbtd  liis  work!!*  I'trsons  m:iy  smilf,  soni<'  may  perhaps 
scoft',  on  this  idea  beinj;  first  prcsi'nted  ti»  their  minds. 
But  we  refer  tbeni  t<»  tbe  words  of  the  hlviinj^elist,  and  tbe 
stalements  (if  (be  Jewish  historian.  *'i// must  either  mean 
tbe  7r/io/r,  or  a  gri'ater  part,  a  Iari;e  propmtion.  And  if 
1,100,000  persons  were  destroyed  in  Jerusalem,  it  is  surely 
not  extravgant  to  state  the  population  at  two  millions. 
Let  any  one  make  tbe  calrulation  for  himself,  and  be  will 
find  that  there  is  nothing  ridiculous  in  our  conclusion.  If 
it  were  intended  that  we  should  believe  as  great  an  impro- 
bability as  this  there  was  need  of  a  much  stronger  and 
more  decisive  word  than  (^anli^id)  baptise,  to  exjircsss  tbe 
tiling.  For  myself,  when  1  apply  tlic  ideas  of  common 
sense,  and  evei-y  day  practice  to  tbese  subjects,  I  cannot 
but  believe  that  John  stood  on  the  batik  of  the  river,  near 
to  Jordan,  and  being  furnished  with  w  ater  by  his  liisciples 
baptised  tbe  crowds  by  perfusion,  in  a  very  summary  way. 

No.  II.  Matt.  iii.  11.  "I  indeed  baptise  )ou  vith  -water;  fei'vSaJl) 
but  he  that  cometh  after  me  is  more  miglity  than  [;  whose  sliocs  I 
am    not  wortliy  to   bear;  lie   shall  baptise  you  with  the  Holy   Ghost 

and  with  fire;'  [ev  nvEviioliy  dyio)  xai  nifi.] 
In  this  passage,  the  same  preposition  is  used  as  in  tbe 
preceding  quotation.  And  bere  it  is  manifest  that  tbe  sub- 
stance used  in  baptism  is  designated,  and  not  the  mode  of 
applying  it.  Jcdin  used  rvater — in  Messiah's  baptism,  fhe 
Spirit  is  a|)|)lipd.  If  any  thing  can  be  learned  respecting 
tbe  ntodc  of  administration  from  tb is  text,  it  is  all  in  favour 
of  affusion  or  jmuring.  Because,  the  promise  which  (iod  lias 
made  of  giving  tlie  Holy  Spirit,  is  almost  al\\a>s  couched 

*  Note.— Did  John's  ministry  last  more  than  three  years 


80 


hi  the  phrase,  "  I  wiW  pour  out  my  Spirit,"  Accordingly 
the  people  of  God  universally  pray  for  the  cnit-pounng  of 
the  Spirit.  Now  surely  after  this  usage  sanctioned  hy  God 
himself,  we  ought  not  to  affii'm  that  the  word,  baptise, 
means  properly  to  immerse^  or  suhmergei  and  to  read 
here,  "  1  indeed  immerse  you  in  water,  hut  he  thatcomcth 
after  me,  shall  immerse  you  in  the  Holy  Spirit.^'  Would 
any  person  venture  to  pray,  that  he  might  he  thus  immer- 
sed? 

Nos.  III.  IV.  Matt.  ill.  13,  4.  "  Then  cometli  Jesus  from  Galilee  t(/ 
Jordan  unto  John  to  be  baptised  of  him.  But  John  forbad  him, 
saying",  I  have  need  to  be  baptised  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to  me.'' 
This  passage  affords  no  room  for  remark. 

No.  V.  Matt.  lii.  16.  "  And  Jesus,  when  he  was  baptised,  went  up 
straightway  out  of  the  water;  and,  lo,  the  heavens  were  opened  un- 
to him,"  &c. 

The  Gi'eek  here  is  oiTto  7a  vSaJog  translated  out  of 
the  water.  The  going  up  of  Jesus  out  of  the  water  is  thought 
to  afford  conclusive  evidence  that  he  was  immersed.  We 
deny  this — 1.  Because,  going  into  the  water  (supposing 
that  he  did  so)  is  not  baptism;  that  is  to  be  performed  after 
the  subject  is  in  the  water,  and  it  then  may  be  performed 
in  various  ways.  But  2.  I  deny  that  Jesus  went  into  the 
water.  The  word  here  rendered  out  of,  in  its  ordinary 
natural  meaning  signifies /roni.  It  is  so  used  verse  13. 
See  above  No.  Ill,  Jesus  cometh  from  Galilee  [aTto.]  A 
hundi'ed  other  instances  might  be  adduced,  such  as.  He 
came /rom  [aTto]  the  field — He  departed /j*om  them — Deli- 
ver us  Jrom  evil,  &c.  &c.  almost  without  end.  We  say 
then,  that  the  words  do  not  necessarily  imply  more  than 
that  our  Saviour  went  down  to  the  margin  of  the  river  to 
be  baptised,-  and  when  the  ceremony  was  performed,  he 
went  up  from  the  water,  that  he  might  be  seen  by  the 
multitude,  when  the  Spirit  visibly  descended  on  him,  that 
this  testimony  that  he  was  sent  by  the  Father,  might  be 
as  public  as  possible. 
Nos,  VI.  VII.     Matt.  XX.  22,  23.     "Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the  cup  thai 


81 


I  bijall  drink  of,  ami  to  be  baplised  with  tlie  baptism  that  I  am  bap- 
tised withi"  Tlicy  say  unto  bim,  We  are  able.  And  hv  saith  unto 
Ihcm,  Ye  shall  «h-iiik  indeed  of  my  ctip,  and  be  baptised  with  the 
baptism  that  I  am  baptised  willi,"  &c. 

The  term  here  has  rcfciTnce  to  the  sufTcrinj^s  endui-cd 
by  our  blessed  Lord,  when  tl)c  divine  fury  was  pnured  on 
his  head,  and  he  was  baptised  with  his  own  bloody  sweat 
in  Gethscmane;  and  more  copiously  with  his  own  bh)od  on 
the  cross.  Nothing  as  to  the  mode  of  christian  baptism  then 
can  bo  determined  from  this  metaphorical  use  of  the  word. 
No.  Vlir.  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all 
nations,  baptising  them  in  the  name,"  &.c. 

This  passage  determines  nothing,  except  what  has  been 
before  observed  respecting  the  intended  universality  of  the 
christian  religion. 

No.  IX.     Mark  i  4.     "And  John  was  baptising  in  the  wilderness,   and 
preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the   remission  of  sins." 

Here  the  Greek  words  arc  (^^anll^uv  evln  epynjjuj,)  rcn- 
dcrcd  baptising  in  the  wilderness.  The  preposition  follow- 
ing the  verb,  clearly  designates  the  place  where  baptism 
was  administering,  viz.  in  theivildcrncsSf  and  not  the  man- 
ner of  baptising.  And  why  may  not  the  same  purpose  bo 
.served  by  it,  when  it  is  connected  with  the  river  Jordan. 
As  it  would  be  ridiculous  to  assert  that  John  plunged  his 
disciples  into  tlie  wilderness,  although  the  text  says  he 
was  baptising  in  the  wiklerness,  [^p  7>7ep>7ao];  why  sliould 
it  be  thought  sound  criticism  to  determine  that  he  put 
them  under  the  water  of  Jordan,  because  it  is  said  e§an- 
lijCpvlo  TV  7g)  Iop<5a^"]p. 

Js'o.  X.     Mark  i.  5.     "  And  they  were  all   baptised  in  the  river  Jordan 

confessing  their  sins."     Parallel  to  No.   I. 
No-  XI.     Mark  i.  8.     "  I  indeed  baptise  30U  with  water,  but  lie  shall  bai)- 

tise  you  with  'he  Holy  Spirit."     Parallel  to  No.  II. 
No.  XII.     Mark  i.  9,  ID.     "  And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days  that  Jesus 

came  from  Nazareth  of  (■alilec,  and  was  baptised  of  John  in  Jonlan." 

We  of  course  read  this,  at  or  near  to  Jordan.    See  No.  III. 
[Remark  however,  that  in  many  passages  f/g,  the  prepo- 
sition here  used  isputforfjr.     See  Matt.  ii.  ys.     •' He  dwelt 


82 


III  the  city  (sl<;  7(o?llv)  called  Nazareth."     Mai*,  ii.  1.  John 

i.  18.     Ads  viii.  40,  &c-] 

No.  XIII.  Mark  vii.  3,  4.  "  For  the  Pharisees  and  all  the  Jews,  except 
they  wash  their  hands  oft,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  eld- 
ers. And  when  they  come  from  market,  except  they  xvash  tliey  eat 
not.  And  many  other  things  there  be  which  they  have  received 
to  hold,  as  the  washing  of  cups  and  pots,  brazen  vessels  and  ta- 
bles." [couches.] 
Here  the  word  is  rendered  waah;   and  has   reference  to 

the  ceremonial   purifications  of  the  Jews,  many  of  which 

•were  performed  hy  the  sprinkling  of  water  on  him  who  was 

legally  impure. — This  passage  has  been  before  adduced  to 

prove  that   baptise  does  not  always  mean  immersion  nor 

submersion,  dipping  in  nor  dipping  tinde7\ 

Nos.  XIV.  XV.     Mark  x.  38,  39.     "  Can  ye  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink 

of,  and  be  baptised  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptised  with?"  &c 

Parallel  to  Nos.  VI.  VII. 

No.  XVI.    Mark  xvi.  16,      "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be 
saved,"  &c. 
This  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  mode  of  administering 

baptism;  nor  indeed    with   any   point   in   dispute    in   the 

whole  subject. 

No.  XVII.    Luke  iii.  7.     "  Then  said   he   to   the  multitudes  that  came 
forth  to  be  baptised  by  him,  O  generation  of  vipers!     Who  hath 
warned,"  &c. 
This  decides  nothing. 

No.  XVIII.    Luke  iii.  12.     "  There  came  also  publicans  to  be  baptised, 
and  said  to  him,  master  what  shall  we  do.'" 
This  also  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  question. 

No.  XIX.  Luke  iii.  16.  "  I  indeed  baptise  you  -with  7vater;  but  one  migh- 
tier than  I  Cometh,  the  latchet  of  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to 
unloose;  he  shall  baptise  you  -with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  with  jire" 
Parallel  to  No.  H. 

No.  XX.    Luke  iii.  21.     "  Now  when  all   the   people  were  baptised,  it 
came  to  pass  that  Jesus  also  being  baptised,"  &c. 
There  is  nothing  here  that  bears  on  the  subject. 

Nos.  XXI.  XXII.  Luke  vii.  29,  30.  "  And  all  the  people  that  heard  him, 
and  the  publicans  justified  God,  being  baptised  with  the  baptism  of 
John.  But  the  Pharasees  and  lawyers  rejected  the  counsel  ef  God 
against  themselves,  being  not  baptised  by  him." 


83 


This  can  have  no  influriK  c  on  the  question  liow  these 
persons  worr  baptised. 

No.  XXni,  Luke  xi.  38.  "  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it  he  marvelled 
th:it  lie  liad  not  first  ivushnl  /"y^  sSoiTlllCEV)  before  dinner." 

Ilei'e  wo  know  that  baptise  does  not  signify  to  immerse 

or  submerge. 

No.  XXIV.  Luke  xiii.  50.  ««  But  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptised  with; 
and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it  be  accomplished.'"'   See  Nos.  VI.  VII. 

Nos.  XXV.  XXVI.  XXVII.  XXVni.  XXIX.  John  i.  23,  26,  28,  31,  33.— 
"  And  they  asked  him,  and  said  unto  him,  Why  baptisest  thou,  then, 
if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias,  neither  that  prophet — John  an- 
swered them,  saying,  I  baptise  -with  water,  but  there  standeth  one 
among  you,  whom  ye  know  not,  8iC.  These  things  were  done  in 
Bethabara  beyond  Jordan,  where  John  was  baptising — And  I  knew 
him  not:  but  that  he  should  be  made  manifest  to  Israel,  therefore 
am  I  come  baptising  with  water — And  I  knew  him  not:  but  he  that 
sent  me  to  baptise  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me.  Upon  whom 
thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining  on  him,  the 
same  is  he  tliat  baptiseth  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
These  passages  either  express  or  imply    a  comparison 

between  the  baptism  of  John,  and  that  of  the  Mes.siah;  and 

therefore  are  referred  to  No.  II. 

No.  XXX.  John  iii.  22.     "  After  these  things  came  Jesus  and  his  c'isciples 
into  the   land  of  Judea;  and  there  he  tai'ried  with  them  and  bap- 
tised " 
Nothing  concerning  the  mode  here. 

No.  XXXI.  John  iii.  2,  3.  «  And  John  was  baptising  in  Enon,  near  to 
Salem,  because  there  was  much  water  there;  and  tiiey  came  and 
were  bapiised." 

On  this  pas.sage,  it  is  remarked,  in  the  first  place,  that 
John  liad  attracted  grewt  attention;  that  great  d'owds  Hock- 
ed to  him  for  baptism;  that  the  land  of  Jud-a  is  a  liot  and 
thirsty  land;  that  in  all  rliniatcs,  and  esj)ecially  in  one  so 
warm,  multitudes  i»f  people  w  itli  their  cattle  require  a  largo 
supply  of  water  J'or  drink.  At  the  ca7H/>  meetiMs;s  which 
arc  held  in  this  country,  wht're  two  or  tliree  thousand 
people  assemble,  attention  to  this  circumstance  is  entirely- 
necessary.  Now,  suppo.se  that  an  advertisement  published 
by  some  of  our  Methodist  brethren  should   contain  this. 


84 

among  other  statements,  that  there  was  at  sucli  a  camping' 
ground  an  abundance  of  water;  and  suppose  titat  tiiis  notice 
should  be  preserved  fo;*  some  ages,  and  finally  fall  into  th€ 
hands  of  a  people  practising  baptism  by  immersion,  and 
ignorant  of  the  tenets  of  the  Methodists — Why  then,  accor- 
ding to  the  mode  of  reasoning  applied  to  this  passnge  of 
scripture,  it  would  at  once  be  concluded  that  the  people 
br^ptised  by  immersion:  In  other  words,  that  the  Metho- 
dists were  Baptists!  Hence  we  see  t!ic  fallacy  of  the 
reason  which  concludes,  that  John  immersed  those  that 
came  for  baptism,  because  he  selected  a  place  where  there 
was  much  water.  This  miglit  have  been  done,  for  any 
thing  that  we  know,  for  tlie  accommodation  of  the  crowd, 
that  all  might  have  enough  to  quench  their  thirst. 

Again,  all  that  we  know  about  Enon  amounts  to  very 
little  "  It  is  near  to  Salim,  eight  miles  south  of  Scytho- 
polis."  By  its  name  it  imj»orts  to  be  a  single  spring;  the 
fountain  of  On.  This  fountain  flowed  in  many  streams 
[7to7i?[a  vSoila;  the  true  rendering  of  the  words  used  by  the 
Evangelist;  and  not,  miich  water,  as  in  our  translation.^ 
This  subject  is  well  illustrated  by  a  celebrated  traveller. — 
«  In  2  Rings,  ii.  20,  The  elders  of  Jericho  complaijied  to 
Elislia,  "  the  water  is  naught,"  as  it  is  in  our  translation; 
but  t!ic  words  are  plural  in  the  Hebrew;  and  the  Greek 
rcnilering  is  plural  also — [ra  vSata  Ttovy^^  the  streams 
are  bad.]  Now,  what  says  matter  of  fact  to  this?  Maun- 
drell  sliall  inform  us.  "  Its  waters  are  at  present  received 
ill  a  basin,  about  nine  or  ten  paces  long,  and  five  or  six 
broad:  and  from  thence  issuing  out  in  good  plenty,  divide 
themselves  into  several  small  streams,  dispersing  their  re- 
freshment to  all  the  field,  between  this  and  Jericho,  and 
rendering  it  exceedingly  fruitful" — The  fountain  of  On 
was  probably,  then,  sufficiently  copious  to  allow  its  waters 
to  be  divided  into  a  number  of  small  streams,  (7to/U«. 
(j^ra)   which,   running  in  different  directions,  afforded  a 


85 


supply  of  water  fbr  the  humbcrs  which  nttendot)  on  John's 
ftdministrations;  anilivith  the  water  of  this  fountain  he  bap- 
tised them — not  in  i(,  for  then  it  would  not  have  been  use<l 
for  drinking;  and  cooking! 

No.  XXXII.     John  iii.  26.     «'  And  they   came  unto  John,   and   said  unto 
him.  Rabbi,  he   that  was  with  thee  Ijcyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou 
bearest  witness,  behold,   tlic  same  baptiscth,  &c." 
This  decides  nothinjs;,  and  requires  no  remark. 

Nos.  XXXni.  XXXIV.  John  iv.  1,  2.  "  Jesus  made  and  baptised  more 
disciples  than  John — Jesus,  however,  did  not  baptise,  but  his  dis«?i- 
ples." 

Nothing  to  the  point  before  us. 

\o.  XXXV.  John  X.  40.  "  Jesus  went  away  again  beyond  Jordan,  into 
the  place  where  John  was  baptising." 

Same  remark. 

Vo.  XXXVI.     Acts  i.  5.     "  For  John  truly  baptised  -aith  water;  but  ye 
shall  be  baptised  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence."     See 
No  II. 
NTos.  XXXVII.  XXXVIII.     Acts  ii.  38,  41.     "  Then  Peter  said  unto  them. 
Repent  and  be  baptised  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ 
— Then  they  that  gladly  received  the  word  were  baptised." 
Nothinj^  as  to  the  mode. 
^os.  XXXIX.  XL.   XLI.     Acts  viii.  12,  13,  16.      "  Those  who  believed 
Philip  preaching,  were  baptised,  both  tnen  and  women — Simon  also 
believed,  and  was  baptised — Only  they  were  baptised  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesu.s." 
Same  remark. 
>?os.  XLII.  XLIII.    Acts  viii.  36, 38,  39.     <'  And  as  they  went  on  the  way 
they  came  to  a  certain  water  (7l  {>&0p,   as  vague  and  general   an 
expression  as  language  will  admit)  and  the  Eunnch  said,  behold! 
here  is  water;  what  hindereth  that  I  should  be  baptised? — And  he 
commanded   the  chariot  to  stop;  and  both  Philip  and  tlie  Eunuch 
went  down  into   leig    to]  the  water,  and  he  baptised  him — And 
when  they  went  up  out  of  [e;c  from]  the  water,"  &c. 
This  passage  requires  particular  observation;  and  1.  We 
arc  utterly  uncertain  what  water    was  intended,   whether 
well,  fountain  streamlet,  creek,  or  river:  "NVc  only  know 
that  the  country  was  called  desert;  and   this  warrants  the 
belief  that  there  was  no  great  stream  of  water;  perhaps  a 
M 


86 


streamlet,  perhaps  a  spring.  2.  But  if  tliis  were  not  so;  if 
tlirrc  was  a  river  in  the  desert  of  Judali,  towards  Gaza, 
wliicli  has  escaped  the  notice  of  the  geographers,  then  I 
would  ohsprve  that  tlic  language  of  our  translation  docs 
not  require  the  helief  that  the  Eunuch  was  immersed  in 
water.  For  let  it  be  considered  that  the  feet  and  legs 
were  generally  naked  in  the  ancient  mode  of  dressing,  ex- 
cept the  soles  of  the  feet  which  were  protected  by  sandals, 
and  that  Philip  and  the  Eutmch  would  have  less  difficulty 
in  stcjiping  into  the  water,  than  two  gejitlemen  equipped  in 
modr-rn  dress;  that  the  Eunuch  was  travelling,  and,  for 
all  that  appeals,  he  stopped  on  the  road  side;  that  the 
mode  of  immersion  required  a  change  of  raiment,  which 
from  the  delicacy  of  eastern  men  respecting  the  expo- 
sure of  their  persons,  would  have  been  extremely  un- 
pleas;\nt  to  this  Ethiopian  lord;  and  one  will  hesitate 
exrecdingly  to  decide  that  he  was  submerged  by  the 
Evangelist.  3.  But  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  two 
prepositions  (^ig  am!  ey)  translated  into  and  out  of?  For 
the  first,  (eig)  I  find  that  it  has  fifteen  different  mean- 
ings. Tlicsi-  need  not  be  sjiecified.  Among  them  arc 
these,  to,  unto,  at.  For  instance.  Matt.  xv.  24,  «'  I  was 
not  sent  save  to  (eig)  the  lost  sl-eep  of  the  house  of  Israel." 
Matt.  xxii.  4.  ««  All  things  ace  ready;  come  ye  to  (f^g) 
the  marriage."  Jolin  xi.  31,  "  She  goeth  to  (ftg)  tlie  se- 
pulchre, that  she  may  weep  there."  Verse  32,  "  Seeing 
liim,  she  fell  at  (sig)  liis  feet."  John  xiii.  1,  "Having 
loved  his  own,  he  loved  them  to  (ag)  the  end."  Matt  ii.  1. 
*<  ^yise  men  came  from  the  East  to  (ag)  Jerusalem."  Verse 
8,  <»  And  sending  them  to  Bethlehem,  he  said,"  &c.  Verse 
12,  *'  They  returned  to  their  own  country."  Mark  xiii. 
14,  "  Then  let  those  in  Juden,  flee  to  the  mountains." 
Matt.  v.  1,  "  And  seeing  the  multitude,  he  went  up  to  a 
mountain,  (aveSri  eig  16  opog,  very  similar  to  the  phrase 
in  the  text  xate^naav  eig  to  i&jpO       Now,     why    not. 


»7 

accoidinp^  to  these  numerous  examples,  rendor  tlirse  words 
thus,  T/ieij  went  donvn  to  the  water?  As  lor  (lio  jncposi- 
tioii  (fx)  rendered  out  oJ\  anioiii;  its  various  si,u;uirications, 
we  tVeijuently  find  from.  Matt.  xii.  42,  «  The  queen  of 
the  south  shall  rise  up  in  judgment  with  this  generation, 
and  shall  condemn  it:  hecause  she  r ame/ro?u  (ex)  tlic  utter- 
most part  of  the  earth  to  hear  the  wis(h)m  of  Solomon,''  &c. 
Matt.  xiii.  49.  **  And  they  (the  angels)  shall  separate  the 
wicked /roni  (fx)  the  mi<lst  of  the  righteous.'*  Matt.  xvi. 
1,  **  The  Pharasces  asked  him  to  show  them  a  sign  from 
(fx)  heaven.*'  Matt,  xviii.  9,  "  Until  the  son  of  man  shall 
arise  from  (ex)  the  dead.**  And  in  many  otiier  passages. 
In  perfect  conformity  with  the  usages  of  the  (ireek  lan- 
guage then,  we  may  I'ender  the  passage,  *'  They  went  up 
from  the  waier^  Instead  of,  th'ij  went  up  out  of  the  water,''* 
Taking  into  riew  the  whole  train  «>f  circumstances,  and 
the  meaning  of  the  Greek  words,  it  seems  to  me  that  the 
natural  and  easy  and  fair  interpretation  of  the  passage  is 
this: — Philip  and  the  Eunuch  went  from  tlic  carriage  down 
to  the  water;  and  haptism  having  hecn  administered,  they 
went  up  from  the  water,  (prohahly  a  fountain  near  the 
road)  to  the  carriage  again.  It  must  be  assumed  then  that 
haptism  was  performed  hy  immersion,  hcfore  immersion 
can  he  found  in  the  haptism  of  the  Eunucli.  But  this  is  the 
point  in  controversy. 
No.  XLIV.  Acts  ix.  18.  "  And  immediately  there  fell  from  his  eyes 
as  it  had  been  scales,  and  he  received  sight  forthwith,  and  arose, 
and  was  baptised."  [xoi  aiuataq  kSaTVCiaOri-] 
In  tilis  passage,  the  woi'd  taken  in  its  connections,  and 
the  various  circumstances,  lead  to  the  belief  that  Paul  was, 
baptised  in  a  standing  posture.  Let  any  person  whq  can 
read  Greek,  turn  to  Matt.  xxvi.  62,  and  construe  literally 
the  words  [xcu  dmCTag  6  dp;^;<epfi'$»  ^^']  rendered  in  oup 
translation,  '•  And  the  higli  priest  arose  and  said.  What 
was  the  posture  of  the  high  priest,  while  speaking?  See  a 
similar  phrase,  Mark  xiv.  6o.     Acts  i.  15 — v,  34,  and  in 


88 


various  other  passages.  What  Is  the  posture  of  a  man  who 
(dvacftdg  srv^Byf)  <««'ose  and  was  struck?  What  was  the 
posture  of  Paul  when  he  was  baptised?  Farther — Paul  had 
been  blind  and  was  fasting  for  three  days.  In  this  exhaus- 
ted and  debilitated  state,  Ananias  came  in — Paul's  sight 
was  restored,  and  forthwith  (7tapa;t;pri/tax,  instantly,  dum  res 
agitur)  he  stood  up  and  was  haptised:  after  which  betook 
food  and  was  strengthened.  All  the  circumstances  here, 
as  well  as  the  express  words  of  the  text,  are  against  the  opi- 
nion that  the  apostle  Paul  was  led  away  and  immersed. — 
And  I  do  not  want  more  valid  baptism  than  was  adminis- 
tered to  him,  as  he  stood,  doubtless  by  sprinkling  or  pour- 
ing. 

Nos.  XLV.  XL VI.  Acts  x  47,  48.  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that 
these  should  not  be  baptised,  which  have  received  the  Holy  Ghost 
as  well  as  we — And  he  commanded  them  to  be  baptised  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord." 

These  are  Peter's  words,  and  Peter's  command,  when  he 
saw  the  Holy  Spirit  was  poured  out  on  the  Gentiles.  The 
manner  of  speech  corresponds  best  with  the  manner  of 
bringing  water  for  the  administration  of  baptism.  If  the 
persons  to  be  baptised  were  to  go  to  the  water,  it  would  be 
most  natural  to  make  them  the  object  of  the  verb  forbid;  but 
if  water  was  to  be  brought,  then  that  would  naturally  be 
the  object;  as  in  the  case  here — «  Can  any  man  forbid  wa- 
ter,**  &c.  Does  not  the  phraseology  favour  the  mode  of 
administration  by  sprinkling? 
No.  XLVII.     Acts  xi.  16.     '«  John  indeed  baptised  -with  water;  but  ye 

shall  be  baptised  wth  the  Holy  Ghost." 
Parallel  to  No.  II. 
No.  XLVIII.    Acts  xvi.  15.     "  And  when  she  [Lydia]  was  baptised  with 

her  household,"  &c. 
This  decides  nothing. 
No.  XLIX.     \ets  xvi.  33.     "  And  he  took  them  the  same  hour  of  the 

night,   and  washed  their  stripes;  and  was  baptised  he  and  all  his 

straightway." 
Tbf»  words  here  determine  nothing  concerning  the  mode 
of  baptism;  but  the  circumstances  have  considerable  weight. 


89 


This  baptism  was  performed  in  the  night — in  prison — and 
immediately  [7tapayp)7ua,  forth witlu  on  the  spot — ]  after 
the  stripes  of  the  apostle  had  been  washed.  Every  circum- 
stance furnishes  a  strong  presunii)tion  against  baptism  by 
immersion,  and  in  favour  of  sprinklingor  pouring.  It  re- 
ally seems  to  me  utterly  improbable,  that  the  Jailor  would 
have  taken  his  prisoners  out  of  prison,  or  that  such  a  man 
as  Paul  would  have  gone  out  in  the  dead  hour  of  tiie  night. 
(Sec  Verse  37.)  On  the  contrary,  it  appears  entirely  pro- 
bable that  the  Jailor  atjd  his  family  were  bajjtised  with 
some  of  the  water  brought  to  wash  the  stripes  of  the  apos- 
tles. 

JS'^ote. — The  Jailor's  house  was  a  part  of  t!»c  prison. — 
Compare  verses  26  and  34. 

No.  L.     Acts  xviii.  8.     "  And  Crispiis  the  chief  ruler  of  the  synagogue, 
behevcd  on  the  Lord  with  all  his  house;  and  many  of  the  Corinthi- 
ans hearing,  beheved  and  were  baptised." 
This  passage  is  nothing  to  our  present  purpose. 

Nos.  LT.  Lll.  L  II.  Acta.  xix.  3,  4,  5.  "  And  he  said  unto  them,  Unto 
what  tiien  were  ye  baptised?  And  they  said,  Unto  John's  baptism. 
Then  said  Paul,  John  verily  baptised  with  the  baptism  of  repen- 
tance, saying  unto  the  people,  that  they  should  believe  on  him 
that  should  come  after  him,  that  is,  on  Christ  Jesus.  When  tliey 
heard  tliisthcy  were  baptised  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 
Nothing  here  is  determined  as  to  the  moile  of  baptising. 

This  passage  has  been  before  rcmai'ked  on. 

No.  LIV.     Acts  xxii.  16.     <«  And  now  why  tarriest  thou?     Arise,  and  be 
baptised,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Loni." 

This  refers  to  Paul's  baptism  before  considered. — Wliat, 
did  Paul  do,  wlien,  as  lie  lay  on  his  bed,  Ananias  told  him 
to  arise  [.stand  up]  and  be  baptised?  Did  he  not  stand  uj) 
and  receive  the  holy  sacrament?  [aimJra;  iSanTiOaL  ni"e  the 
Greek  words;  and  it  deserves  consideration,  that  accord- 
ing to  the  idiom  of  that  lanc^uage,  these  two  words  d(»  not 
make  two  different  commands,  us  the  B^nglish  reader  would 
suppose,  when  he  reads,  1.  arise;  2,  be  baptised.  But  that 
the  participle  (am^-a^)  simply  modifies  the  signification  of 
the  \erh  jSanrtaai,  or  rather  i.s  used  to  complete  the  action 


90 


of  the  verb;  tlici'cforc,  instead  of  warranting  the  opinion 
that  Paul  rose  up,  went  out,  and  was  immersed,  it  defin- 
itely and  precisely  expresses  Ins  posture  when  he  receiv- 
ed baptism,  just  as  if  Paul  had  been  too  weak  to  stand,  and 
Ananias  had  said  dvaxXivag  BanricaL*  lying  down  be 
baptised,  it  would  have  been  evident  that  he  received  bap- 
tism in  a  recumbent  posture. 

No.  LV  Rom  vi.  3.    "As  many  of  us  as  were  baptised  into  Jesus  Christ 
were  baptised  into  his  death." 

Would  any  person  choose  to  render  tins  passage,  As  ma- 
ny of  us  as  were  immersed  into  Jesus  Clirist,  were  immers- 
ed into  his  death?  Is  it  not  evident  that  the  signifieation 
of  the  word  here  goes  beyond  the  external  rite,  as  it  has 
been  explained  in  tlie  beginning  of  this  Essay?  But  see 
remarks  on  the  word  /?a7tricr^a,  baptism.  No.  LXXVII. 
No.  LVI.  LVII.     1  Cor.  i.  13,  14.     "  Were  ye  baptised  in   the  name  of 

Paul?    I  thank  God  I  baptised  none  of  you,  save  Crispus  and  Gaius." 
No  remark  necessary. 
Nos.  LVIII.  LIX.  LX.     1  Cor.  i.  15, 16,  17.     "  Lest  any  should  say  that  I 

had  baptised  in  my  own  name — And  I  baptised  also  the  household 

of  Stephanas;  besides,  I  know  not  whether  I  baptised  any  other-"' 
Wd  have  notliing  to  say  here. 
No.  LXI.     1  Cor.  X.  2.    «  TJiey  v/ere  all  baptised  into  Moses  in  the  cloud 

and  in  the  sea-" 

Baptism  in  a  cloud  must  be  by  sprinkling;  for  that  is 
the  natural  action  of  the  cloud:  and  certainly  the  Israel- 
ites were  not  immersed  in  the  cloud.  Baptism  in  tlie  sea, 
(that  is  the  lied  Sea,)  could  not  have  been  by  immersion, 
because  by  miracle  the  waters  were  removed,  and  the  peo- 
ple went  over  on  dry  land.  The  only  baptism  by  means 
of  the  sea  must  have  been  from  its  spray,  that  is  by  sprink- 
ling. 

No.  LXII.  1  Cor.  xii.  13.  "By  one  Spirit  we  are  all  baptised  into  one 
body." 
This  proves  nothing  as  to  the  mode,-  but  it  shows  that 
diflFerences  as  to  this  matter  ought  not  to  break  the  unity 
of  the  church,  or  prevent  the  communion  of  members  of  the 
same  body> 


91 


No.  LXIU.     1  Cor.  XV.  29.    "  Else  what  shall  tht  y  do,  who  arc  bapti-scci 
for  the  dead'" 
No  iTinui'k. 
No.  LXIV.     Gal.  iii.  2/.     "  As  many  of  you  as  were  baptised  into  Christ, 
have  put  on  Christ." 
Here  is  !i(»  j)ra(»f  for  or  against  iminehsion. 
The  words  (Somliajia  aiid  ^anlLU^iog,  baptism,  occur  in 
the  following  passages. 

\o.  LXV.     Malt.  iii.  7.    ♦'  Seeing'  many  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  com- 
ing to  his  baptism,"  6c,c. 

No  remark. 
Nos.  LXVI.  LXVII.    Matt.  xx.  22,  2S.    Before  quoted.     See  Nos.  Vr.  and 

VII. 
No.  LVIII.     Matt.  xxi.  25.     "  The  baptism  of  John  whence  was  it,"  Stc 

No  remark. 

No.  LXIX.    Mark  i-   4.     "  John   was  baptising  in  the  wildcrncsi,   and 

preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance." 
Determines  iiotliiiii^. 
JVos.  LXX.  LXXI.     Mark  vii.  4,  8.     "  And  many  other  things  which  they 

have  received  to  hold,  as  the  washings  (baptisms)  of  pots,  of  cups_, 

of  brazen  vessels,  and  tables. — And  again,  washings  (baptisms)   of 

pots  and  cups." 

Here  the  word  means  washinj;,  and  that  in   an  indeter- 
minate manner.     Certainly,  however,  not  by  iininer.sion  in 
the  case  of  tables  or  rourhes. 
Nos.  LXXII.  LXXTIT.     Mark  x.  38,  39.     These  passages  are  preeisoly  pa 

rallel  to  LXVI.  LXVII,  and  need  not  be  quoted. 
No.  LXXIV.     Mark  xi.  30.     Parallel  to  LXVIII. 

No.  LXXV.    Luke  iii.  3.     "  Preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  thfe 
remission  of  sins," 
No  remark. 
No,  LXXVI.    Luke  xii.  29.     «« Being  baptised  with  the  baptism  of  John,*- 

No  remark. 
No.  LXXVII.     Luke  xii.  50.     "  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  bapti  ed  with  and 
how  am  I  straitened,"  Sic. 

No  remark. 

No.  I>XXVni.     Luke  xx,  4.     See  No.  LXVIII. 

No.  LXXIX.     Acts  i.  22.     "  Begining  fi-oni  the  baptism  ot  Jolm.*' 

No  remark. 
Vo.  LXXX.     Acts  X.  37.    "  After  the  baptism  which  .'oha  pr-:ach<;d." 


92 


No  rciiuirk. 

No,  LXXXI.  Acts  xiii.  24.  "  John  preached,  before  his  coming,  the 
baptism  of  repentance  to  all  the  people." 

No  remark. 

No.  LXXXH.     Acts  xvlii.  25.    "  Knowing  only  the  baptism  of  John." 

No  remark. 

Nos.  LXXXIII.  LXXXIV.     Acts  xix.  3,  4.     «  Andhe  said  unto  them  unto 
what  then  v/ere  ye  baptised?    And  they  said,  unto  John's  baptism.. 
And  Paul  said,  John  indeed  baptised  the  baptism  of  repentance," 
&c. 
Let  us  try  how  the  word  immersion  will  do  here. — Into 
what  were  ye  immersed?      Into  John's  immersion — John 
immersed  the  inmicrsion  of  repentance. — What  strange  and 
harsh  language  is  this?     Note,  there  is  no  Greek  word  an- 
swering to  the  withf  before  baptism  in  Paul's  remark,  as  it 
is  in  the  common  version. 

No.  LXXXV.  Rom.  vi.  4.  "  Therefore  wc  were  burled  with  him  by  bap- 
tism into  death,  that  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead,  even  wc 
alsosliould  walk  in  newness  of  life." 

See  No.  LXXXVII. 

No.  LXXXVI.     Eph.  iv.  5.     "  One  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism." 

This  determines  nothing. 
No.  LXXXVII.     Col.  ii.  11,  l2.     "  In  whom  ye  also  are  circumcised  with 
the  circumcision  made  without  hands,  in  putting'  off  the  body  of  the 
sins  of  the  flesh  by  the  circumcision  of  Christ;  buried  with  him  in 
baptism,  wherein  also  ye  are  risen  with  him  through  the  faith  of  the 
operation  of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead." 
This  passage  and  the  one  referred  to  it  above,  are  supposed 
strongly  to  favour  the  mode  of  immersion;  because  there  is 
is  an  allusion  to  the  burial  of  Christ;  and  to  bear  nut  this 
allusion,  it  is  thought  that  there  should  be  a  resemblance 
between  t!ic  administration  of  baptism,  and  the  manner  of 
burying.     Let  us  take  nothing  on  trust,  but  examine  for 
ourselves.     I  remark, 

1.  Tlie  manner  of  burial  among  ourselves,  by  letting  a 
corpse  down  into  the  grave,  may  perhaps  influence  the 
judgment  of  many  in  this  case.  But  the  interment  of  our 
Lord's  bodv  was  diflTerent.     There  are  at  this  time,  and 


93 


probably  ntiII  be  to  the  end  of  the  world,  many  ancient 
tonib.s  in  the  neigliboui-liood  of  Jerusalem,  wliicli  suiricicnt' 
ly  show  the  manner  of  burial  formerly  practised.*  Cham- 
bers are  excavated  in  liic  solid  rock;  and  in  the  side  walls 
of  these  Chambers,  niches  of  proper  length  and  breadth  arc 
formed  for  the  reception  of  dead  bodies.  After  the  death  of 
our  Saviour,  his  body  was  wrapped  in  clean  linen,  and  depo- 
sited in  one  of  these  niches.  JNow,  what  analogy  exists  be- 
tween such  a  burial  as  this,  and  the  sudden  immersion  of  the 
body  in  water?  What,  between  a  corpse  lying  three  days  in 
a  niche  in  a  chamber  hewn  out  in  a  rock,  and  a  living  bo- 
dy plunged  for  a  moment  in  a  stream  of  water?  Really  the 
resemblance  is  so  remote,  that  I  cannot  persuade  myself 
that  the  apostle  had  it  in  view.  Did  he  not  rather  allude 
to  the  washing  of  the  body  which  was  always  a  part  of  the 
funeral  ceremony? 

2.  The  language  liere  is  figurative;  by  all  rules  of  inter- 
pretation then  the  figure  ought  to  be  kept  up;  that  is  one 
part  c)ijg!it  not  to  be  made  literal,  and  the  other  figurative* 
If  we  must  be  literally  immersed  in  water,  why  not  unto 
death?  But  this  would  bean  adherence  to  a  doubtful  inter- 
l)rctation  not  to  be  expected.  Suppose,  however,  tiie  pas- 
sage should  be  translated  as  some  would  have  it,  <*  We 
arc  buried  with  him  by  immersion  into  death" — what  then 
does  it  mean?  Immersion  into  death!  Buried  with  Christ, 
by  immersion  into  death!     I  cannot  understand  it. 

3.  The  apostle  addressed  this  letter  to  the  adult  members 
of  the  churc  h,  who  as  the  cliiireh  was  recently  organized, 
of  course  were  received  on  a  profession  of  their  faith.  In 
the  woi'd  baptism,  as  seems  to  me,  he  included  the  instruc- 
tion received  by  the  membci*s  of  the  church,  and  conse- 
quently all  tlio  spiritual  trritii  signifieil  by  the  term.  [See 
our  explanation  of  its  meaning  part  I.]     Ba[)tism  into  the 


•  Note — TItis  explains  the  acrount  of  the  demoniacs  mentioned,  Mati 
viii.  28.     Mark  i.  8.    F.uke  viii.  27,  Who  Came  «><it  of  tlie  tomb«,  ?;r; 

N 


94 


•'eatli  of  Christ  then  means  being  brought  into  a  relation 
or  situation,  in  whi(  h  the  baptised  person  shall  be  fully  in- 
strurtetl  in  the  design  of  Christ's  death,  the  obligations  to 
holy  living  resulting  from  it,  and  the  sanctification  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  (the  purchase  of  the  death  of  Christ)  produces. 
And  as  the  \\ ashing,  which  it  has  been  said  always  made 
a  part  of  the  burial  service  of  the  ancients,  signified  that 
they  were  no  more  to  have  communication  with  the  world 
and  be  contaminated  by  it,  so  when  christians  were  bap- 
tised they  were  considered  as  separated  from  the  world,  as 
though  they  w  ere  buried.  They  might  therefore  v5ery  well, 
in  this  figurative  way,  be  said  to  be  buried  with  him  by 
baptism,  be  the  mode  of  baptism  what  it  might.  And  this 
seems  to  me  a  much  more  easy  and  natural  interpretation 
than  the  hard-strained  analogy  between  immersion,  and,  as 
was  before  said,  the  laying  of  Christ's  body  in  a  niche  in  a 
Wall.  The  text  in  Colossians  fully  proves  that  the  apostle 
lias  in  view  the  spiritual  signification  of  baptism;  for  in 
connection  with  the  burial  by  b,iptism  be  mentions  being 
*<  laiscd  by  faith  which  is  the  operation  of  the  spirit  of 
God."  Now  ii  buried  btj  baptism  here  means  immersed,  put 
down  into  the  water;  then  raised  by  faith,  must  mean  raised, 
lifted  up  out  of  the  water.  But  this  is  an  effect  not  com- 
monly astTibed  to  faith.  This  raising  is  partly  the  opera- 
tion of  the  administrator,  and  partly,  of  the  subject  of  bap- 
tism. Clearly  the  apostle  intends  here  to  speak  of  the  spi- 
ritual meaning  of  baptism. 

It  may  be  remarked  in  passing,  that  although  the  text  in 
Colossians,  affords  no  proof  that  baptism  was  administered 
by  immersion,  it  decidedly  proves  that  circunirision  has 
given  way  to  baptism — 'for  Paul  expressly  rails  it  tbe  cir- 
cumcision of  Christ,  that  is  as  we  would  now  express  it. 
Christian  circi)'.*icision. 

Once  more,  we  would  observe  that  in  Rom.  vi.  5,  the 
apostle  continuing  his  discourse  in  reference  to  the  same 
truths,  says,  «  For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  tlte 


95 


likeness  oi  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the  likeness  of  hi»s 
resurrection.  Paul  hei-e  has  the  same  subject  before  him^ 
viz  baptism;  and  here  he  uses  a  new  figure,  that  of  plant- 
ing. What  is  done  or  what  ran  be  done  if  this  is  interpre- 
ted literally,  to  keep  up  the  analogy  1  know  not.  It  is  said 
that  we  are  buried,  when  inunersed;  what  is  done  that  wc 
may  be  planted?  Really  I  wish  to  know;  for  I  feel  just  as 
much  obligation  to  be  plantedt  as  1  do  to  be  buried.  'I'his 
shows  the  impropriety  of  straining  figures  of  speech  be- 
yond what  they  can  wqW  bf^ir. 

No.  LXXXVIII.    Heb.  vi.  2.     "  The  doctrine  of  baptisms,"  Sic. 
No  rcmaik. 

No.  LXXXIX.  Heb.  Lx.  10.  «  Wliich  stood  only  in  meats  and  drinks, 
and  divers  washings  {odTtllClLLti^y  baptisms,")  Sic. 
Here  is  a  clear  reference  to  Jewish  observances;  the 
washings  and  sprinklings  so  common  among  the  Jews  arc 
tern)ed  baptisms.  How  then  can  it  be  affirmed  that  bap- 
tism always  signifies  immersion? 

No.  XC.     1  Pet.  iii.  21.    "  The  like  figure  whereunto,  even  baptism  doth 
now  save  us  (not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,)  but  the  an- 
swer of  a  good  conscience  toward  Cod." 
For  the  interpretation  of  this  passage,  seepage  7,  of  this 
Essay.     1  shall  only  add  here  that  they  who  were  saved  by 
water  at  the  time  of  the  deluge,  were  not  immersed  in  it, 
but  floated  on  it  by  aid  of  the  ark.     If  tiie  deluge  is  in  this 
respect  like  baptism,  then  there  is  no  immersion,  for  they 
that  were  immirsed  were  drowned. 

Unnecessary  trouble  has  perhaps  been  taken;  but  it  was 
wished  to  do  full  justice  to  the  subject.  Every  pa.'^sagc 
has  been  noticed  in  which  the  w«)rd  baptise  or  baptism  oc- 
curs in  the  New  Testament.  The  number  is  just  ninety;  of 
these  sixty-five  are  wholly  indeterminate;  si.xteen  on  the 
whole  favour  the  mode  by  sprinkling  or  affusion;  two  or 
three  of  these  seem  to  make  it  morally  certain  that  the  or- 
dinance was  thus  administered:  and  of  the  remaining  nine 
passages,  not  one  of  them,  nor  all  together,  however  they 


m 


fuay  have  been  relied  on,  prove  that  baptism  waa  admi- 
nistered by  immersion.  The  conclusion  then  is,  that  God 
has  not  prescribed  any  particular  mode  according  to  which 
this  sacrament  is  to  be  administered;  and  that  they  who  would 
limit  the  practice  of  the  church  to  one  specijic  manner,  decide 
tvhat  God  has  left  undetermined. 

While  this  is  my  full  and  firm  conviction,  I  hold  that ont; 
mode  of  baptism  is  preferable  to  another,  and  shall  proceed 
to  show  tlie  grounds  of  my  belief,  that  sprinkling  or  pour- 
ing is  to  be  preferred, 

1.  This  mode  seems  to  me  best  adapted  to  the  universal- 
ity of  Christ's  religion.  It  is  certain,  that  in  remote  north- 
ern regions,  the  rite  cannot  be  administered  by  immersion 
without  much  inconvenience  during  the  greater  part  of  the 
year;  it  is  equally  certain,  that  in  torrid  regions,  where  wa- 
ter can  be  scarcely  obtained  for  drink,  it  would  be  as  in- 
convenient; and  there  are  cases,  suppose  of  a  person  in  the 
last  stage  of  consumption,  earnestly  desirous  to  be  baptised, 
and  giving  good  evidence  of  sincere  belief,  wherein  immer- 
sion might  be  highly  improper.  In  this  case,  the  minister 
might  tell  the  person,  that  the  desire  would  be  accepted, 
and  that  salvation  doef^  not  depend  on  baptism,  &c.  But 
suppose  that  he  should  say,  I  feel  it  to  be  a  duty,  and  my 
conscience  cannot  be  easy  without  complying  with  it. — 
Now  I  ask,  is  the  law  of  Christ's  church  such,  that  no  relief 
can  be  afforded  to  this  scrupulous  conscience?  I  think  not. 
But  in  the  next  place,  and  this  brings  me  to  my  last  pro- 
position, 

I  observe  that  the  great  matter  represented  by  baptism, 
namely  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  his  purify- 
ing influences,  is  expressed  by  the  words  sprinkling,  pour- 
ing, and  the  like.     As  for  example 

Matt:  iii.  11.  ««  He  shall  baptise  you  with  the  Holy 
Ghost:" — Luke  xxiv.  49.  «  Ye  shall  be  baptised  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence."  Now,  this  was  a  pro- 
per real  baptism,  and  was  vlBible  to  the  senses— but  see 


97 


what  Peter  says  on  this  subject.  Acts  ii.  lo,  17,  ''  But 
this  is  that  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet  Joel;  And 
it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  (saitli  God,)  [  will 
POUR  OUT  of  my  spirit  on  all  ilesh,"  tcv.  What  nioie  ex- 
press and  decisive  evidence  can  he  given  tliat  baptism  is 
administered  by  pouring?  Again.  Acts  x.  45.  "  And 
they  of  the  circumcision  which  believed  were  astonisiied,  as 
many  as  came  with  Peter,  because  that  on  the  Gentiles  was 
POURED  OUT  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Here  was  a  be- 
ginning of  the  fulfilment  of  that  prophecy  recorded  in  Isai 
lii.  15.  *<  So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."  It  is  ob- 
vious to  remark,  that  the  baptisuj  performed  by  pouring, 
could  not  be  performed  by  immersion.  And  universally, 
the  communication  of  that  which  is  represented  by  baptism, 
is  expressed  in  scripture  by  words  which  import  des- 
cending—  Such  as  the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit — the  shed- 
ing  forth  of  the  Spirit.  Now,  as  the  baptism  of  the  £l(dy 
Spirit  was  conferred  by  the  descending  of  the  baptismal  ele- 
ment, it  is  clear  tliat  there  is  a  mucli  gi'cater  analogy  be- 
tween the  sign  and  the  thing  signijied^  when  the  water  is 
made  to  descend  upon  the  subject  of  baptism,  than  when  he 
is  pnt  dorivn  into  the  water. 

"  That  there  was  a  resemblance  between  baptism  by  wa- 
ter and  baptism  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  manifest  from  Acts 
X.  47:  «'  for  the  apostle  Peter  seeing  tlie  Holy  Spirit /mwr- 
td  out  on  the  company  at  Cornelius's,  immediately  rcc<»l- 
lected  an  allusion  to  John's  baptism  by  water.  The  Lord 
said,  <  John  baptised  with  water,  but  you  shall  be  Imptiscd 
with  the  Holy  Ghost."  If  there  wei-e  no  resembhuice  be- 
tween the  two  baptisms,  how  came  the  apostK  's  memo- 
ry to  be  refreshed  by  what  he  saw?  How  came  he  to  lay 
a  stress  on  his  recollection,  thus  raised  to  exei'cise?  And 
this  made  so  strong  an  impression  on  his  mind,  that  he  ad- 
verts to  it  a  long  while  afterwards,  (Acts  xv,  8.)  Why  so, 
unless  the  fact  were  striking.  And  if  it  be  asked,  what 
did  be  see?      f  answciv — he  saw  the  pmiring  down  of  the 


9& 


floly  Ghost,-  for  this  is  the  term  expi-essly  used  in  the  his- 
tory." 

Let  us  now  suppose,  first,  that  baptism  is  synonymous 
with  immersion;  and  secondly,  with  pouriuj^,  and  let  us 
substitute  the  synonymous  in  place  of  the  ori.^ina!  terms. 

1.  John  immerses  you  in  water;  but  you  shall  he  immers- 
ed in  the  Hohj  Spirit.  [Note — This  is  contrary  to  the  fact, 
for  the  Holy  Spirit  was  poured  on  them.] 

2.  John  pours  water  on  you;  but  the  Holy  Ghost  shall 
be  poured  on  you  not  many  days  hence. 

Here  is  the  resemblance;  and  it  may  not  be  at  all  surpri- 
sing, that  when  Peter  saw  tlie  Holy  Spirit  poured  out  on 
the  Gentiles,  that  he  should  be  reminded  of  John's  baptism. 
With  this  remark  may  be  compared,  what  is  said  concern- 
ing the  children  of  Israel  being  baptised  unto  M<»ses  in  tlie 
cloud.  And  also,  the  declaration  in  Daniel,  (Septuagint 
Version,)  tliat  Nebuchadnezzar  should  bebaptised  witb  the 
dew  of  heaven.  Dan.  iv.  23,  25,  33.  v.  21.  Here  is  man- 
ifestly descent  of  water,  in  what  is  called  baptising.  For, 
when  water  comes  on  one  from  a  cloud,  it  descends — when 
vapour  is  condensed,  it  descends  in  the  form  of  dew,  and  is 
the  gentlest  manner  of  sprinkling. 

These  remarks  might  be  extended  much  fartber.  But  it 
is  enough. 

Jt  has  been  shown, 

1.  That  the  words  baptism  and  baptise,  in  their  scriptu- 
ral signification,  include,  not  only  an  external  rite,  but  the 
idea  of  teaching,  instruction,  discipline,  together  with  the 
effect  produced  by  that  discipline. 

2.  That,  accoi'ding  to  the  nature  of  tlie  covenant,  and 
agreeably  to  the  ascertained  practice  of  the  apostles,  be- 
lieving parents  and  their  children  ought  to  be  baptised. 

3.  That  dipping  persons  in  water  is  not  necessary;  but 
that  baptism  is  duly  ad  ainistered  by  pouring  or  sprinkling. 

In  undertaking  this  work,  my  sole  object,  if  I  know  my 
own  heart,  has  been  to  promote  what  I  conscientiously 


1^9 


believe  to  be  tlic  truth.  And  1  ti'ust  that  I  have  not  forgoltcu 
that  those  who  ditfer  (Voin  mc  on  this  suhject  arc  bi*etliren. 
"While  I  acknowled/^e  that  <»  they  liold  the  Head;'*  that 
their  ])itty,  their  zeal,  and  activity  in  promoting;  reliji^iori, 
ai"e  to  he  commended,  I  do  believe  that  they  are  in  an  eri-or 
as  to  the  subject  of  baptism;  and  that  tiiis  error  is  injuri- 
ous. I  have  therefore  iVIt  it  to  he  a  duty  to  .2;ivc  uy  views 
of  sci'ipture  doctrine  on  the  suhject.  Many  topics  have 
been  tout  bed  very  supiM'ficially,  and  many  not  at  all.  In 
studying  to  be  brief  I  hope  that  I  have   not  been  obscure. 

Should  any  one  here  be  disposed  to  ask,  what  profit  is 
there  in  baptism?  I  answer  as  I'aid  answered  a  similar 
questi(Mi  respecting  circumcision — Much  every  w.\v.  As 
the  oracles  of  God  were  Cduimittcd  to  the  Jews,  and  tlie  pi- 
ous in  ^hc  world  were  genei-ally  fount!  anionij  tlic  seed  of 
Abraham,  so  it  is  now.  Reliajion  in  a  very  remarkable 
way  runs  in  families.  There  are  multitudes  in  the  present 
day,  who  like  Timotliy,  have  known  tiie  scriptures  from 
their  youth,  and  exer<ise  that  faith  which  was  in  tlieir  mo- 
thers and  jjrandmotliers.  In  fact  t!i<'  baptisin.i^  of  the  chil- 
dren of  believers  seems  to  be  a  most  important  means  of 
ensurini^  their  heinj^  trained  in  tiic  nurture  and  admonition 
of  the  Lord;  of  their  being  taught  to  observe  all  tilings 
whatsoever  Christ  has  coinmand-d.  Baptism  being  the 
seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  or  of  God's  righteousness 
as  elsewhere  it  is  termed,  when  applied  to  young  members 
of  the  visible  church,  gives  assurance  that  the  means  of  dis- 
cipline when  faithfully  used  according  to  God's  ap['ointmcnt 
shall  not  be  employed  in  vain.  This  affords  much  encou- 
ragement to  parents  in  the  arduous  work  of  training  their 
children  in  the  way  in  which  they  should  go. 

And  while  these  happy  eflTecfs  arc  to  he  expected  from 
the  due  observance  of  Christ's  ordinance,  the  dot  trine 
which  has  been  exhibited,  seems  t«)  me  to  afford  the  only  solid 
comf.rt  to  a  ])arent  anxiously  enquiring.  What  will  be- 
come of  njy  children,  when   my  head   "jiliall   Uf  hid  in  thr 


100 


iijrave?  G()(rs  ciivcuaut  oii.2,':igeriiciit  comes  in' then  ior  his 
suppart,  ar,«l  he  rrjoices  iit  hopr,  wliilc  he  reads  the  pro- 
mise, "  I  will  be  a  God.  to  thee  and  to  thy  secd.^*  For  be- 
ing   Ciihist's,  hk   is   a   child   of    x\BRAHAM,  j*ND  A.S 

nV.lR   ACCOIIOING    TO    THE    rUOMISE. 


Fi:\iS, 


\i>.i 


